TLDs vs ccTLDs?
-
*Was trying to get this question answered in another thread but someone marked it as "answered" and no more responses came.
So the question is about best practices on TLDs vs ccTLDs. I have a .com TLD that has DA 39 which redirects to the localized ccTLDs .co.id and .com.sg that have DA 17. All link building has been done for the .com TLD. In terms of content, it sometimes overlaps as the same content shows up on both the ccTLDs.
What is best practices here? It doesnt look like my ccTLDs are getting any juice from the TLD. Should I just take my ccTLDs and combine them into my TLD in subdomains? Will I see any benefits?
Thanks
V
-
Thanks, Jane, that's a much better answer/example!
-
Hi again,
Sorry it has taken a few days to get back to you. I replied in the other thread about ccTLDs versus using one site. Some additional info: in general, you will have an easier time using the subfolder structure recommended in the other question (again, as long as there are no factors which make it important to have country-specific domains). The Singapore / Indonesian sections of the website will naturally inherit authority because they sit on the strong .com. Just being linked to by the .com isn't enough to give them such a large boost.
Apple uses this strategy for internationalisation: http://www.apple.com/uk/ for the UK, http://www.apple.com/nz/ for New Zealand, http://www.apple.com/sg/ for Singapore and so forth.
On the other hand, BlackBerry uses subdomains: http://uk.blackberry.com/ and http://sg.blackberry.com/.
Amazon obviously uses ccTLDs.
All of these domains are hellishly strong in their own rights; traditionally it has been thought of as best to use one site like Apple does if you are no a mammoth already. However, you can make other options work with good link development. I think in your case, one domain is something to seriously consider.
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
-
Landing pages for paid traffic and the use of noindex vs canonical
A client of mine has a lot of differentiated landing pages with only a few changes on each, but with the same intent and goal as the generic version. The generic version of the landing page is included in navigation, sitemap and is indexed on Google. The purpose of the differentiated landing pages is to include the city and some minor changes in the text/imagery to best fit the Adwords text. Other than that, the intent and purpose of the pages are the same as the main / generic page. They are not to be indexed, nor am I trying to have hidden pages linking to the generic and indexed one (I'm not going the blackhat way). So – I want to avoid that the duplicate landing pages are being indexed (obviously), but I'm not sure if I should use noindex (nofollow as well?) or rel=canonical, since these landing pages are localized campaign versions of the generic page with more or less only paid traffic to them. I don't want to be accidentally penalized, but I still need the generic / main page to rank as high as possible... What would be your recommendation on this issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ostesmorbrod0 -
DA vs Relevancy - Trade Off Question
Hey Guys We all know that relevancy largely trumps DA nowadays. What I am wondering is if there is a DA 'level' at which relevancy doesn't really matter - you probably still want a backlink from that site... For example, sites with DA of 100 we probably want backlinks from. So where do you draw the line? What I mean is for a high DA 'non relevant' site, what DA is 'acceptable' where you start to disregard relevancy? I'm thinking something like 70 and above would like some other thoughts... Obviously you would still be building relevant links too, developing content to do so and all that good stuff. I am just wondering what DA I should focus on for building non-relevant links ALONGSIDE relevant links 🙂 Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GTAMP0 -
Cookieless subdomains Vs SEO
We have one .com that has all our unique content and then 25 other ccltd sites that are translated versions of the .com for each country we operate in. They are not linked together but we have href lang'd it all together. We now want to serve up all static content of our global website (26 local country sites, .com, .co.uk, .se, etc) from one cookie-less subdomain. Benefit is speed improvement. The question is whether from an SEO perspective, can all static content come from static.domain.com or should we do one for each ccltd where it would come form static.domain.xx (where xx is localised to the domain in question)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aires-fb770 -
Unique domains vs. single domain for UGC sites?
Working on a client project - a UGC community that has a DTC model as well as a white label model. Is it categorically better to have them all under the same domain? Trying to figure which is better: XXX,XXX pages on one site vs. A smaller XXX,XXX pages on one site and XX,XXX pages on 10-20 other sites all pointing to the primary site. The thinking on the second was that those domains would likely achieve high DA as well as the primary, and would passing their value to the primary. Thoughts? Any other considerations we should be thinking about?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | intentionally0 -
Canonical link vs root domain
I have a wordpress website installed on http://domain.com/home/ instead of http://domain.com - Does it matter whether I leave it that way with a canonical link from the domain.com to the domain.com/home/ or should I move the wordpress files and database to the root domain?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JosephFrost0 -
Divs Vs Table for styled data\
Hello, We're in the process of launching MultipleSclerosis.net and are a bit confused with how to present some specific information. Looking at pages such as http://multiplesclerosis.net/symptoms/, http://multiplesclerosis.net/what-is-ms/courses-patterns/ and http://multiplesclerosis.net/treatment/prescription-nonprescription-medications/ is it better to keep this data structured as divs, and style them as tables or to keep them as tables and style them accordingly. Though not technically "tabular" data, i'm not too sure how to handle this. The text to code ratio is quite high with the divs in the markup, which though i'm not overly worried about, it could cause some issues with the site's indexability. Thanks I appreciate any feedback.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OlivierChateau0 -
Dynamic Links vs Static Links
There are under 100 pages that we are trying to rank for and we'd like to flatten our site architecture to give them more link juice. One of the methods that is currently in place now is a widget that dynamically links to these pages based on page popularity...the list of links could change day to day. We are thinking of redesigning the page to become more static, as we believe it's better for link juice to flow to those pages reliably than dynamically. Before we do so, we need a second opinion.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RBA0 -
External 404 vs Internal 404
Which one is bad? External - when someone adds an incorrect link to your site, maybe does a typo when linking to an inner page. This page never existed on your site, google shows this as a 404 in Webmaster tools. Internal - a page existed, google indexed it, and you deleted it and didnt add a 301. Internal ones are in the webmaster's control, and i can understand if google gets upset if it sees a 404 for a URL that existed before, however surely "externally created" 404 shoudnt cause any harm cause that page never existed. And someone has inserted an incorrect link to your site.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SamBuck0