localexperts

Google DOES NOT rank .TV well. Every time this comment is made, someone brings up search terms that don't register on wordtracker or Overture. Heck, my .TV sites rank well for "pest control TV" or "disc jockeys tv". No one seaches for those keywords.

Ranking #1 for those search terms is as worthless to me or any end user as a book on how to address Y2K issues.

Go to Estibot, neither Jersey TV" or "Bob Parsons" show up in the AJAX Overture tool. These two examples are low search volume, low competitive search terms.

Also.....using words like "I like", "probably", "I'm sure". These are opionions. This is not subjective. .TV domains rank high or they don't for high search terms.

I have a small team of folks who have been very successful getting sites highly ranked for highly competitive search terms. Their track record has been nothing short of stellar. One person, has been doing SEO since the 90s.

So you can understand, why I tend to listen to these individuals when they give me feedback on SEO issues.

The message I have gotten from these individuals is simple, Every SEO techniques that works on our .COM and .NET sites does not work with the .TVs. Every SEO technique they have used since the late 90s doesn't work.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/dot-tv/506186-tv-and-google.html

Disagree with my comments - Find keywords which get more than 5,000 searches a month according to AJAX/Estibot where a .TV domain is ranked in the top 5 positions.

Right or wrong, hopefully we can get to the truth. If that truth is an SEO bias against .TV - I'm sure everyone on this board would agree that we need to collectively work together to correct the situation.

hullswingerscom

i would just put "filipino" in google not "filipino tv"sure it may be no1 in google
why do domainers keep on adding the tv and say iam no1 in google?

__________________
www.transport.tv

lzy

Google "fansub".

It used to be first result but it appears Wikipedia is the number one result now.

__________________
...

snoop

Very well said.

Steven

I became very curious about this since I was seeing 50/50 answer in regards to .TV or other TLD ranking and Google

Here's the reply from Webmaster Trends Analyst at Google after I asked them

If I can get in touch with my friend working at Google, I will ask him as well.

I'd also like to develop a site with TLD ranking well in SEO, and if in the case .TV does not rank well, like what localexperts has said, we should work together to correct the situation.

__________________
Domain Name

Steven

I used google webmaster tool's geographic target function.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

For .TV, it works as neutral TLD like .com, .net, .org, .info instead of ccTLD
You can set the geographic target to any country. Otherwise, it targets everywhere like .com.

When I tested it out with my .ca name, it says I can't change the geographic target

"Your site's domain (.CA) is already associated with the country/region: Canada"


Geographic target setting function only works with gTLD (neutral)

http://www.google.com/support/webmas...y?answer=62399

With google webmaster trends analyst saying that no tld is better than one another in regards to ranking, and .TV acting like gTLD (furthermore, go to Google.TV... it'll redirect to your country's google), it's a definite win for .tv developers and investors!

__________________
Domain Name

localexperts

Interesting.

One other thought, despite the comment made by the Google rep, I've also found my posts on SEO boards referencing .COM, .NET, and .ORG being viewed differently than other TLDs like .INFO and .BIZ.

Google is a black box. You never know exactly what is going on with them.

I have a .TV where I spend over $1,000 a month buying the keyword tied to the domain. We spend more than anyone else in this field. That .TV is #1 on Yahoo for SEO. Not found on Google in the first five pages. I have a .NET where we also spend $1,000 a month. Both sites have been up the same amount of time. The .NET is actually in a very competitive field when compared to the .TV where we are the only major player. The .NET is #4 on Google and climbing for the keyword tied to the domain. I have a .COM where we spend $500 a month, it is #1 on Google. I have another .COM where we spend $1,000 a month. it is #1 on Google. I can go right down a list like this with .COM and .NET ranking well and .TV doing well on Yahoo and no where on Google unless you search for the "keyword TV"

To an old programmer who has years of experience finding bugs in code, this looks like a trend. Then you add Hulls and others on this board with the same experience. Something is going on.

I will not invest in any more TV domains until I'm convinced this is not a problem. And I would think that is a concern considering the compliants about lack of sales in the marketplace, combined with the amount of investment we did in 2007 in the .TV extension.

It may not be due the ccTLD.

But until I find a .TV ranking in the top 5 for a high search term, the only counter points is ruling out symptoms - not providing evidence that a problem doesn't exist.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

Sorry, I've very hard headed.

Steven

Hi George,

I don't have much experience with adwords yet, but does increased adwords spending/usage help with the rank or just gives searchers a sponsored search on the google and on content network (traffic increase) or both?

Google is focusing on quality of the results parsed out by its search engine, and it takes a lot of seo work to rank it high. Its algorithm is different than yahoo's, but I don't know and can't comment on complexity of it... not to mention, it's constantly changing/improving.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

I wish I can say something solid, but all I can give at the moment is some of the facts I've collected and a conclusion derived by them. I haven't factored in some of the other things yet. I still have a lot to learn about seo...


If it works out well for .TV, it'll be even more attractive to potential end users and developers.
I'm hoping for the best heh..

__________________
Domain Name

localexperts

Hey Steve, I appreciate the data. Your finding is very interesting. It might not be due to the ccTLD issue based on that datapoint. I don't know what is the issue. I wish I did. I appreciate your research.

Based on that research, I'm going to start researching the TLD bias by launching a .info and driving traffic to it. Some posted that .INFO is biased due to the amount of low quality sites on that extension. Lets see how .INFO does vs .TV.

If they both rank nowhere, then I would tend to believe it is a .COM, .NET, and .ORG positive bias.

All I will say is this, Google views length of reg as evidenced of trusted sites since most low quality sites are registered year to year.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

If you take this logic one step down the road, then sites which spend money advertising on Google should represent the top tier internet sites since most parked and low quality content sites don't advertise.

Combined with the domain matching the search term you are targeting...it is a powerful combination since high search term .com and .nets cost a pretty penny to buy or have been regged for years.

And that might be the big issue with .TV - most .TV domains were recent regs. They don't have the longevity of the .com and .nets. I can see this argument being the issue with .TV. Maybe Yahoo doesn't factor longevity as high as Google.

That does not match our experience. I got fat, dumb, and lazy with success. When presented with an easy path and a hard path, I'm going to invest in the easy road.

hullswingerscom

i could have got the same keyword in org.uk but i regd the tv

now the one page org.uk has been regd with a good rank saying "coming soon"

next time its easy road for me!

__________________
www.transport.tv

treebytheriver

I have a geo, a very poorly developed geo site and not the best city in the country (Italy) by any means, the word also means "vast" or great, in spanish and portugeuse. It ranks 8 in google results, on page #1, the .tv blog. Type in "Vasto", and see it. Why, I don't know, google is a mystery to me.

If you type in Savory + recipes, I'm on the #3 page of google. Savory + video, I am on #2, again, who knows why...............if you type just "savory" page #4.

localexperts

very few searches for savory and zero people bidding on the keyword.

Low number of advertisers typically means less competitive for SEO since people don't target it in their metatags. Same with the savory variants.

It should be easy for a .TV to rank well with this type of keyword. Yet, page #4 on a keyword that has some volume and low targeting.

equity78

http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3147340.htm

__________________
Congrats and Thank you to RJ

Protect your brand,secure your .sucks today

treebytheriver

So, the more common keywords (more commonly searched) have to work harder to reach google's top pages? And they are always below the .com's, net's, org's and info's?

Would there feasibly be anything that could be done to help change things in this case??

localexperts

Yes because everyone looks at wordtracker and/or overture results and targets what people are searching. We don't target "wedding images" for our wedding photographer domains - b/c no one searches for it.

If we were #1 for "wedding images" it would be worth $0, if we were #1 for "wedding photographers", the domain would have automatic $XX,XXX of value.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

Yes, you can do something - buy a .com, .net, or .org for a high volume, competitive search term, have quality content, register the domain until 2015, and advertise the site.

bigdipper

Sounds like what we are hearing here almost makes a case for a lesser searched, lesser known "brandable" .tv versus a highly searched, high quality "keyword" .tv..... Just find a highly focused, relatively non-competitive niche, and we are on our way...

If it's truly that difficult to rank for highly competitive keywords then i certainly can understand the hesitation and resistance to certain aspects of the dot tv extension.

I have a few that i'm just starting to plan develop. I must say that i do appreciate everyone's thoughts and insight here in that i may have to alter my plans slightly.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

localexperts

Most end users want generic names tied to high volume search terms.

Brandable domain names. Unless you have millions to brand the name here is what you are faced:

1) An inability to get high ranked in Google - so no traffic
2) And no advertisers since no one will find your site

So you will be forced to spend thousands of dollars each month driving traffic to your site. Losing money for months, if not years - hoping to build a base.

????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186
Brandable domains - do have value - but it is very spotty since the value of the domain is not predictable depending on an end user wanting that domain vs any other alternative.

generic domains == predictable value

OH and I say that as the person who ran Respond (dot) com. That domain was worthless to us who wanted to be highly ranked for keywords like 'weddings', 'home improvement', 'cosmetic surgery', 'fitness', 'landscaping'

That domain might be worth millions, but it was worthless to me because I had to purchase most of the traffic we got.

I'm not a big fan of brandable domains.

I wouldn't, unless this is a hobby and not a business.

hullswingerscom

its all getting Complexed
all i know is if i dont get a good google ranking for my tv keyword i will shop someplace else.

i will close all my dot tvs down over the next few days

if i cant get a little village ranked whats the point i have one page org.uk coming soon ranked better.

and wait see if things change!

__________________
www.transport.tv

soggyindo

hi, just another person reporting anecdotal evidence that .tv ranks much, much worse than .com, .net, or .org.

IMHO a brandable name is ok for SEO - as long it's a brandable .org, .com or .net!

my gut feeling is that .me is even ranking great - and a ccTLD also - i can't understand why that would be.

i love the idea of .tv. but i've had "coming soon" pages ranking high in .org, compared to .tv sites with content not even appearing in search results - both indexed, both same amount of SEO, links, equally competitive terms...

as someone looking to make a few bucks with searches not adsense, i have to say i've stopped buying .tv and won't be developing any more, unless i hear things have changed. it's disappointing - we need to have 10,000,000 great .tv sites out there to cause a change - but on a limited money/ time budget, what else can you do?
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

add to that $30 renewal fees...

__________________
Get a top quality domain portfolio, blog, or developed website, from $479.
Quote NAMEHUGGER11 for a NamePros only discount.
Artist Website | Contemporary Art Blogs.

bigdipper

So i keep trying to think around this problem with things like "KeywordTv.com" again...

But almost no one that i am aware of currently searches for "Keyword + Tv"?



I must be a real dummy b/c i still have faith. It may not be right here, right now... but somehow i have this "stubborn" faith in the future of dot tv. How is it going to happen though if everyone keeps having these traffic issues?

localexperts

I agree.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

In fact that is the point.

But in a few days someone will post on this thread that their site is #1 for some remote KeywordTV search and say "Google loves .TV. I don't think there is an issue. I love .TV. Want to buy my .TV domain ranking #1 for Superior TV on Google. $10,000".

bigdipper

LocalExperts, folks like you have a lot more knowledge through your experiences than i could hope to have at this point. It's the good folks like you that are willing to share that make this site so damn appealing.

Thank you and everyone else for your thoughts!!!

localexperts

I don't know whether I have more experience with SEO. I was really fustrated when I was at Respond. We couldn't rank well on Google for any keyword of value. So I hired a couple SEO experts. They did nothing.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

The funny thing is that I bought my current company from one of my SEO experts because it was highly ranked for the keyword "wedding". That person could never replicate that success with any of our domains.

So when I moved to the new company, I do have an SEO team that has a better track record.

But here is what I did. Google is a tech company. The algo was written by engineers. I'm an engineer.

So I found the Stanford thesis written by the Google founder and I read it. As a programmer, I felt like I understand what they were trying to do. So I bought a domain and went on my gut.

First day it was spidered. No sandbox. Not page three. Bottom of page one for the keyword I was targeting. Within months, it was #1.

That search term get 60,000+ searches a month on OVT according to Estibot/AJAX. It is a high search category, but not overly competitive.

My SEO team was shocked. Their comment, how did you do that. My response, I stopped trying to assume I knew how Google worked....I read their playbook and understand their mental approach to search.

So we did it again, and again, and again. We had a cookbook.

Then I came to .TV. Having success with .COM and .NET, I was like "hey lets try this with .TV, so many quality terms are unregged".

The cookbook didn't work for .TV. I had my SEO guys start working on it. They couldn't get it to work. I spoke with some friends. I got feedback that anything other than .COM, .NET, and .ORG would be an issue. I thought they were just religious zealots.

I'm no SEO expert. I'm just a programmer. When you think like a programmer, Google's search algor makes sense. Remember, I have spent alot of time debugging code written by other programmers. I've had to put myself in their shoes and anticipate where the problem is in code (that when printed would be more pages than War and Peace).

equity78

So local will you be selling your .tv portfolio ?

__________________
Congrats and Thank you to RJ

Protect your brand,secure your .sucks today

localexperts

No, but I am focused on QUALITY (as you have preached).

There is another story that ties to my .TV investments. So we had a deal with contractor (dt) com. At the time, Respond had 10X the traffic (in home improvement) of our partner. We charged $350/yr. Contractor charged $1,000. When the partnership ended, we lost many contractors to them. I would sit in on customer service calls with contractors who were leaving our service. The message I got was that the contractors are willing to pay MORE on a site with LESS traffic because "we are a contractor, we have to advertise on Contractor(dt)com". I believe the same logic will apply to DOT TV.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=506186

I believe this logic will only apply to .COM and .TV (because both extensions have universal branding). It won't work with .NET, .ORG, .INFO, .BIZ, etc. .PRO - it might work 2 - haven't tested it with our advertisers.

How I've adjusted my strategy is to keep my prime DOT TVs. For the most part they are one word DOT TVs. The two word DOT TVs I will keep have significant value like TummyTuck.TV or PestControl.TV in the sales process.

How I have changed my approach is that I now have to go after .COM and .NET domains to bolster weak areas where we only have a .TV in that vertical.

I love DOT TV as a brand, I just don't like it for SEO.