The Age of Your Domain Does Not Improve Your Ranking

[David Jackson]

According to Google’s engineer Matt Cutts, the age of your domain name does not affect your Google search engine rankings. You should only worry about your content and the links that point to your domain.

Well, with all due respect to Matt Cutts, I disagree. If you take any topic and look at the top positions on both Google and Yahoo, almost without exception, the sites in the top 10 positions are predominately older sites - at least 3 years old.

Are their exceptions? Yes, there are. But they are generally few and far between. Despite what Matt Cutts says, I believe that the age of a domain does figure into Google's ranking system. I really do.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

David Jackson

[Lynn Terry]

My guess would be it has more to do with "authority" than age.

It's easy to get brand new domains indexed and ranking with longtail keyword phrases, so that's obviously not a (general) issue.

[Lynn Terry]

Do you have a link to the post/page where the Matt Cutts comments you quoted can be found?

[David Jackson]

Do you have a link to the post/page where the Matt Cutts comments you quoted can be found?

Here you go, (http://www.morditech.com/mivablog/seo/google/seo-fyi-the-age-of-your-domain-name-does-not-matter.html) Lynn.

David Jackson

[BobTheTeacher]

The age is definitely a factor because of the linking that can compound over time.
This is why I continue to be frustrated in my attempts to get the #1 spot for "bob jenkins" on google, and instead this lame site is #1: http://burtleburtle.net/bob/index.html

(I am however 6, 7, 10, 11, and 12)

Bob

[masonworld]

This is a classic logic problem: correlation does not equal causation.

Just because the top rankings have high domain age (correlation) that does not mean that the high domain age is the CAUSE of the top ranking position.

When older domains exist, they will tend to have more content. Content attracts links. Links create authority. Authority causes pages to rank. All of this takes time.

As Lynn points out, longtails are easy to rank with new domains because a small amount of authority can win.

Having said that, I would be SHOCKED to learn that the domain age is not a factor in the algorithm -- I expect that Google uses all available data to rank pages. I just don't personally think it is a big factor.

[David Jackson]

The age is definitely a factor because of the linking that can compound over time.

Exactly. It takes time to develop the amount of quality links necessary to improve your ranking. So, the age of your domain has to be a factor.

David Jackson

[David Jackson]

I expect that Google uses all available data to rank pages. I just don't personally think it is a big factor.

Just to be clear, I never said that domain age was a big factor. My exact words were, "the age of a domain does figure into Google's ranking system."

David Jackson

[David Jackson]

My guess would be it has more to do with "authority" than age.

We're having a great debate here, but I disagree with you Lynn. The majority of sites in the top 10 positions across the board are not authority sites. For example, if you type in "hair salon" or "virtual assistant" the majority of the sites in the top 10 are not authority sites. The fact of the matter is, there are very few actual authority sites. And if you research this like I did, you'll find this pattern across the board, regardless of the topic.

David Jackson

[masonworld]

Very interesting. I do see your point. For "virtual assistant" I see domains with high domain age and low numbers of backlinks holding the top three spots. Very interesting.

I am a little surprised by that result. I don't personally consider that conclusive, but it is sure suggestive of the importance of domain age.

[David Jackson]

Very interesting. I do see your point. For "virtual assistant" I see domains with high domain age and low numbers of backlinks holding the top three spots. Very interesting.

I am a little surprised by that result. I don't personally consider that conclusive, but it is sure suggestive of the importance of domain age.

You're exactly right, Mark. While I personally don't have the time, inclination or resources to do more comprehensive research. I suspect if someone did that type of research, the results would indeed be conclusive in favor of domain age.

Methinks Matt Cutts is throwing us a curveball. :D

David Jackson

[Lynn Terry]

Perhaps they're trying to discourage people from buying aged domains and slapping crap sites on them.

I've always heard that domain age AND the length of your registration are both factors, albeit holding little weight compared to on-page optimization & link reputation.

But again, I've had new sites on a 1-year registration rank very well very quickly for the longtail - so does this only apply for the competitive phrases (like "sandboxing")?

[David Jackson]

I've had new sites on a 1-year registration rank very well very quickly for the longtail - so does this only apply for the competitive phrases (like "sandboxing")?

That's a great question, Lynn. I wish I had a great answer for you. But I'm not an SEO expert, nor do I claim to be. I think a competent SEO expert is more qualified to answer this question than I am.

That being said, does anyone truly understand the intricacies of Google's everchanging algorithm process? I'm not so sure.

David Jackson

[Lynn Terry]

I don't see Google or their algorithm's as ever-changing, but rather as constantly evolving. Which is necessary.

The question we have to ask ourselves, as webmasters & bloggers, is:
Are we part of the problem, or part of the solution?

[David Jackson]

The question we have to ask ourselves, as webmasters & bloggers, is: Are we part of the problem, or part of the solution?

Now that question I can answer. I think far too many marketers are part of the problem. I think there are too many marketers who try to "game" the system, instead of putting in the hard work necessary to improve their ranking.

The good news is, using nefarious tactics rarely work anymore and are at best effective short-term.

David Jackson

[jkgourmet]

Now that question I can answer. I think far too many marketers are part of the problem. I think there are too many marketers who try to "game" the system, instead of putting in the hard work necessary to improve their ranking.

The good news is, using nefarious tactics rarely work anymore and are at best effective short-term.

David Jackson

well said, David. Bravo!

Interesting thread. Thanks for starting it.

[David Jackson]

well said, David. Bravo!

Interesting thread. Thanks for starting it.

Thank you, jk! I agree, it's been an interesting debate. It's so nice that we can all disagree without being disagreeable. Now, if only congress could adopt a similar adult mindset. :)

David Jackson