IT.COM

SEO PRACTICES with new gTLDs - Great CASE STUDIES - Read & Learn

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

atinc

EntrepreneurTop Member
Impact
3,372
Two great articles from SEO experts, they are testing and comparing SEO results for dot Com and new gTLDs.

Below you can see some of the highlights from the articles and I strongly suggest all of you read the complete articles.


Article #1:

Actual results, not just speculation, is much better in proving the value of New gTLDs, especially the keyword rich ones.

Let’s look at, for example, two separate, totally unrelated websites that moved from .COM to a New gTLD domain name. I studied the results of a car dealership moving from a .COM to a .CARS domain name, and published a case study with the detailed results. I then studied a local attorney’s website that moved from a non-keyword rich .COM to a keyword rich .ATTORNEY domain name. I also published detailed results, as well, in a case study. What I found was, in both cases, the websites appear to have benefited from migrating to a domain that has their keyword in the ending, a keyword in the TLD.

After reviewing data about the migration, reviewing keyword rankings before and after the migration, and thoroughly reviewing the site’s Google Analytics data, I can honestly say that the site didn’t suffer any rankings drops. It was quite the opposite, the site’s enjoying first-page organic rankings for a significant amount of keywords. And, you have to admit that a top ranking for an important keyword phrase is pretty impressive, even if it’s for an Exact Match Domain (EMD).

Google stated that “Overall, our systems treat new gTLDs like other gTLDs (like .com & .org). Keywords in a TLD do not give any advantage or disadvantage in search.”

But what’s interesting to note, however, is the fact that keyword rich exact match domain names, especially those that have keywords in their endings, tend to rank fairly well.

source: www.searchenginejournal.com/moving-new-gtld-domain-name-help-rankings/163098/


Article #2:

Some see a positive SEO effect:

There have been a few notable instances of websites that not only don’t rank worse than .com, but actually appear to perform better. Take, for example, the remarkably quick success of coffee.club.

coffee.club is one of the biggest success cases so far for a new TLD. The website was able to climb to the front page of Google US for searches of coffee club, which is very uncommon for a new website.

In order to rank highly for a search query, backlinks are beneficial because the anchor text (the text that the reader sees and clicks on) becomes associated with the domain name via a hyperlink. Had the links displayed Coffee Club with a hyperlink to coffee.club then this wouldn’t be unusual; however, this was not the case for any of the links. Not only that, the term coffee club wasn’t used anywhere else like the title, meta description, content or alt tag for a photo.

What’s unusual here is that none of the links use the anchor term coffee club, and interestingly, 80% use the term coffee.club. This supports the idea of Google considering a top-level domain as a keyword. In this case, it would be noticing backlinks with the term coffee.club and interpreting it as the phrase coffee club.

source: www.hover.com/blog/do-new-top-level-domains-affect-seo/


Still both articles states that :

  • New gTLDs won’t rank any worse than .com

and


  • We just don’t have enough data to show us that New gTLDs help on rankings.


In my opinion, results speaks for itself...

If you are a developer and know how SEO works, you can make your own tests and see if you came up with same results.






 
Last edited:
10
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
I swear, it's like you have reading comprehension issues or something. Not only did I read them, I linked to threads where we talked about them before you even joined the forum. Domainer vs SEO? I started in the affiliate marketing world. I'm well versed in SEO and PPC.

As I said you are taking the untalented one's word against the SEO professionals.

You are just believing what you want to believe in.

I just saw your edit and your question.

I am not sure since it is not my expertise. But it sounds reasonable, would give you an idea about the statistics.

I guess that question also asked directly to the SEO Expert in one of the threads you shared above and he replied and explained it.

Didn`t you read it O_o
 
Last edited:
1
•••
This only applies for niche industries where the extension potentially adds value.

You are right and every industry has its own niches.

The more people say how great these new extension are the less I believe them.

Good for you, you have a right logic there.

Good luck!
 
Last edited:
0
•••
I've never referred to myself as an expert, but I've worked an an SEO consultant since 2003, and been commissioned by some very large global brands over that time. Not sure if that qualifies my view below, but since we're talking about expert SEOs in this thread just thought to mention it first.

I've seen no evidence anywhere of there being any fundamental benefit of using new gTLDs over any other TLD. I've also seen nothing to suggest nGTLDs will rank any worse than other TLDs either. But the one thing I have pretty high confidence about is that Google does not consider the TLD for anything other than geotargeting as in the case of ccTLDs and a small handful of TLDs that became popular hacks for cc. There was also a very small number of cases where Google took action against entire TLDs (and in some cases these were actually 2nd level TLDs whose operators marketed them as TLDs) by banning the entire TLD due to spam.

I've read a lot of articles around this topic, and not one of the "experiments" I've read into could be described as scientific in its make-up or approach.

Just my $0.02 on this.
 
1
•••
I've never referred to myself as an expert, but I've worked an an SEO consultant since 2003, and been commissioned by some very large global brands over that time. Not sure if that qualifies my view below, but since we're talking about expert SEOs in this thread just thought to mention it first.

I've seen no evidence anywhere of there being any fundamental benefit of using new gTLDs over any other TLD. I've also seen nothing to suggest nGTLDs will rank any worse than other TLDs either. But the one thing I have pretty high confidence about is that Google does not consider the TLD for anything other than geotargeting as in the case of ccTLDs and a small handful of TLDs that became popular hacks for cc. There was also a very small number of cases where Google took action against entire TLDs (and in some cases these were actually 2nd level TLDs whose operators marketed them as TLDs) by banning the entire TLD due to spam.

I've read a lot of articles around this topic, and not one of the "experiments" I've read into could be described as scientific in its make-up or approach.

Just my $0.02 on this.

Did you run any tests to see results or those are just your assumptions from your past SEO experiences?

If you read the first article, author explains different views by different SEO professionals yet saying they don`t make any researches or tests and making assumptions.

What is the exact time line you worked as a SEO Consultant and when you stopped?

I am asking cause I wonder if you could make such tests today only for your own curiosity?

If so please share with us since it would help us understand more on this topic.

If not no problem, your comment would help us to look skeptic for both the SEO expert who wrote article #1 and the SEO expert who wrote the article #2 and probably you - past SEO Consultant who commented that they are both made-up stories.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Did you run any tests to see results or those are just your assumptions from your past SEO experiences?
No. I stated clearly that I've seen no reproducible evidence that supports the hypothesis that new gTLDs rank better than any other TLD, nor that Google or other search engines uses the word found in the TLD for ranking purposes.
What is the exact time line you worked as a SEO Consultant and when you stopped?
As stated, I first started learning SEO around 2000, and first started working professionally as an SEO consultant in 2003. This is still my main job today.
I am asking cause I wonder if you could make such tests today only for your own curiosity?
Testing anything in SEO is extremely difficult due to the fact that you cannot control the inputs. You're testing an algo that changes constantly, often monitoring 3rd party domains and content that also change frequently, neihger of which you have any control over. If you try to set up your own domains to test you're instantly introducing bias since these tend to be new websites without history.

A basic tenant of testing is that you should hold all other variables constant in order to test for any one given variable. Doing so allows you to measure the effect of that one variable alone. But this is virtually impossible in the SEO field as you have to test in a live (and highly dynamic) environment. The best you can generally do is correlation studies to see how much a given change correlates with a given outcome.

So no, this is not a test I would run for idle curiosity.

All I can say, again, is that I've seen no scientific evidence to support any claims that new gTLDs inherently rank better than any other TLD.
If not no problem, your comment would help us to look skeptic for both the SEO expert who wrote article #1 and the SEO expert who wrote the article #2 and probably you - past SEO Consultant who commented that they are both made-up stories.
Sometimes you have to read between the lines when reading "expert" views. Some authors have hidden agendas, and when you make a considerable % of your money consulting for new gTLDs perhaps some bias is introduced into your research (which sometimes maybe should be labelled "marketing material"). Certainly the author in article #1 has repeated such claims multiple times, but oddly enough no other SEO has been able to scientifically support the author's claims. The fact that Google has publicly stated that the TLD "word" is not used for query retrieval (apart from navigational queries where user actually types in the full domain) should carry more weight than opinions of experts who may or may not have ulterior motives.

I am not saying that these stories are "made up" (you're putting words into my mouth here). The authors may well have observed what they claim, but the question is do these claims stand up to vigorous evaluation? In my opinion the answer is no.

As to the second article linked - it claims nothing more than there being no disadvantage to using new gTLD over other TLD. Also noteworthy is that the publisher is a registrar with a direct interest in selling new gLTDs.
 
6
•••
No. I stated clearly that I've seen no reproducible evidence that supports the hypothesis that new gTLDs rank better than any other TLD, nor that Google or other search engines uses the word found in the TLD for ranking purposes.

As stated, I first started learning SEO around 2000, and first started working professionally as an SEO consultant in 2003. This is still my main job today.

Testing anything in SEO is extremely difficult due to the fact that you cannot control the inputs. You're testing an algo that changes constantly, often monitoring 3rd party domains and content that also change frequently, neihger of which you have any control over. If you try to set up your own domains to test you're instantly introducing bias since these tend to be new websites without history.

A basic tenant of testing is that you should hold all other variables constant in order to test for any one given variable. Doing so allows you to measure the effect of that one variable alone. But this is virtually impossible in the SEO field as you have to test in a live (and highly dynamic) environment. The best you can generally do is correlation studies to see how much a given change correlates with a given outcome.

So no, this is not a test I would run for idle curiosity.

All I can say, again, is that I've seen no scientific evidence to support any claims that new gTLDs inherently rank better than any other TLD.

Sometimes you have to read between the lines when reading "expert" views. Some authors have hidden agendas, and when you make a considerable % of your money consulting for new gTLDs perhaps some bias is introduced into your research (which sometimes maybe should be labelled "marketing material"). Certainly the author in article #1 has repeated such claims multiple times, but oddly enough no other SEO has been able to scientifically support the author's claims. The fact that Google has publicly stated that the TLD "word" is not used for query retrieval (apart from navigational queries where user actually types in the full domain) should carry more weight than opinions of experts who may or may not have ulterior motives.

I am not saying that these stories are "made up" (you're putting words into my mouth here). The authors may well have observed what they claim, but the question is do these claims stand up to vigorous evaluation? In my opinion the answer is no.

As to the second article linked - it claims nothing more than there being no disadvantage to using new gTLD over other TLD. Also noteworthy is that the publisher is a registrar with a direct interest in selling new gLTDs.
Thank you for taking a moment to post this reply.

I've read a lot of articles around this topic, and not one of the "experiments" I've read into could be described as scientific in its make-up or approach.

Apparently, I misunderstood your post above. ( made-up)
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Apparently, I misunderstood your post above. ( made-up)
Apologies - my English there could have been a little simpler.
 
1
•••
Apologies - my English there could have been a little simpler.
My apologies I misunderstood.

I understand that you don`t find the methodology correct of the author at article #1.

What do you think of coffee.club scenario ?

the backlinks on other sites were coffee.club but when the site was out and when you type coffee club - google showed them in the first page.

Isn`t it a bit controversial then what google states?
 
0
•••
the backlinks on other sites were coffee.club but when the site was out and when you type coffee club - google showed them in the first page.
This makes sense to me. The ranking was achieved through anchor text of incoming links. Google isn't ignoring the "club" in anchor text, and there's value here in having .club coming from anchor text, but that's entirely different from any inherent benefits from using the TLD itself. Does this make sense?
 
1
•••
This makes sense to me. The ranking was achieved through anchor text of incoming links. Google isn't ignoring the "club" in anchor text, and there's value here in having .club coming from anchor text, but that's entirely different from any inherent benefits from using the TLD itself. Does this make sense?
Well I had to search for what anchor text means in SEO first but now it makes sense :xf.smile:

So google do not ignore the extensions in anchor text even if they have dot on the left of the extension.

Did I get it right?

Thanks for sharing, I`m learning new stuff!
 
0
•••
so just did a search for jacksonville attorney, it is not even in the top 7 pages of google anymore. heh.
 
0
•••
so just did a search for jacksonville attorney, it is not even in the top 7 pages of google anymore. heh.
It is actually on the first page ranks second.

But the domain is different, it is theinjurylawyerteam.com which @JB Lions mentioned that it directs to there.

This is also very interesting, you type jacksonville attorney but google shows you the website which it is directed to.

And when you search "injury lawyer" on google they are not listed in the first 3 pages...

Weird stuff.

@Brandworthy could you explain why this is happening?

Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
This is also very interesting, you type jacksonville attorney but google shows you the website which it is directed to.
I very much doubt the redirect has anything to do with it. Much more likely the .com site ranks on its own merits.
 
1
•••
As I said you are taking the untalented one's word against the SEO professionals.

You are just believing what you want to believe in.

I just saw your edit and your question.

I am not sure since it is not my expertise. But it sounds reasonable, would give you an idea about the statistics.

I guess that question also asked directly to the SEO Expert in one of the threads you shared above and he replied and explained it.

Didn`t you read it O_o

they were paid by Rightside or some other registry to do this study!!!

This is like a study sponsored by Coca-Cola claiming that softdrinks don't contribute to obesity.

Also you can't call that even a study as the sample was so small and the differences observed weren't even that large, Meaningless really.

A fancy ad for the gullible minds among us.
 
2
•••
@Brandworthy I'd like to ask you, is the domain, for instance, "gold.forsale" an EMD for "gold for sale" or an EMD for "gold" ? In other words, is the tld taken into account ?
 
0
•••
I apologize in advance if what I say is repetitive as I did not read the posts.

When all things are equal .com gets higher CTR and more Conversions.

As for SEO CTR is a factor conveying relevance, so no brainier here either....and If Google manipulates search results it will only be temporary.

I mean really how old are those articles? At least a year? Feels like I've read them quite a long time ago.

If you can't get the keyword you want in .com, then get a tld or cctld, then look elsewhere (new g's).

As of Today it should be obvious their is no equal comparison with a .com and a new gtld. Yet here we are Again.

P.s. I hope I wasn't rude, just writing hurriedly as I have to go now.
 
0
•••
@Brandworthy I'd like to ask you, is the domain, for instance, "gold.forsale" an EMD for "gold for sale" or an EMD for "gold" ? In other words, is the tld taken into account ?
From a domain perspecitve it's an EMD for "gold. Google ignores the "forsale" in the TLD for ranking purposes (that's the current wisdom anyhow). But if sites link to this using the anchor text "gold.forsale" Google may incorporate the "forsale" in its ranking signals.
When all things are equal .com gets higher CTR and more Conversions.

As for SEO CTR is a factor conveying relevance, so no brainier here either....and If Google manipulates search results it will only be temporary.
I'd love to see any research which finds that .com gets higher conversion? That's really a factor of the site itself rather than the TLD I expect. What I've seen around CTR hasn't been able to state that .com gets higher CTR with any reasonable level of confidence. But if you know of any better research I'd love to read it.
 
1
•••
I very much doubt the redirect has anything to do with it. Much more likely the .com site ranks on its own merits.

A quick Majestic search shows the redirected site apparently had a number of links with "Jacksonville.attorney" anchor text. The redirect passes those links to the target (theinjurylawyerteam.com).
Also, far less competition for "Jacksonville Attorney" than for "injury lawyer".
They're about halfway down page 2 for "Jacksonville injury lawyer" and "Jacksonville personal injury lawyer" which are more valuable terms for them them, since they dont have a national presence.
(Their branding is inconsistent and their local SEO needs help - both probably hurting them, but those are unrelated issues)
 
Last edited:
3
•••
A quick Majestic search shows the redirected site apparently had a number of links with "Jacksonville.attorney" anchor text. The redirect passes those links to the target (theinjurylawyerteam.com).
So this is why we see theinjurylawyerteam.com when we type Jacksonville Attorney on Google.

Anchor texts playing a big role on the google search.

Thanks.
 
0
•••
From a domain perspecitve it's an EMD for "gold. Google ignores the "forsale" in the TLD for ranking purposes (that's the current wisdom anyhow). But if sites link to this using the anchor text "gold.forsale" Google may incorporate the "forsale" in its ranking signals.

Thanks for making that clear.

So the person who bought "video.games" for a big sum as an EMD for "video games" actually blundered.
 
0
•••
So this is why we see theinjurylawyerteam.com when we type Jacksonville Attorney on Google.
.
They're loosely optimizing for it too, but probably getting more benefit from the redirected Jacksonville.attorney backlinks.

Makes sense that Google values anchor text, since it usually tells visitors what they will find if they follow the link.
 
2
•••
.com is given higher rank than others by Google, full stop
 
0
•••
There might be new members here who doesn`t understand why @JB Lions is everywhere on new gTLD forum bashing all the good news for gTLDs.

Let me clear it for you folks: He is strictly investing on dot coms and own zero new gTLDs and his aftermarket sales are suffered dramatically since new gTLDs has established.

Yet I have to admit that he owns few killer .coms in his portfolio.

You might ask the same question about me, why am I promoting new gTLDs?

I am just speaking the real facts given by real experts from the industry just to educate you.

I have experiences using a new gTLD for one of the businesses I own and I can say that it is really helping us grow and reaching out to new customers as well as giving us a good credibility by owning such niche in our industry. (interested to know what it is, visit Link Removed by Mod)

You might see my signature dominated by new gTLDs but I own 55% gTLDs and 45% .coms ( which are mostly killers)

I have to say that I am seeing so many new domainers on namePros listening to these guys and losing so much money registering nonsense dot com domains or buying so called brandable domains from them while there are too many opportunities still available on new gTLD side.

I won`t try to sell my new gTLDs to you, cause I haven`t registered them to selling to you!

I will only encourage you to invest smartly.

But on the other hand gTLD bashers are here to sell their left out crappy domains and profit from the new domainers little knowledge.

Heads UP People!

Heads Up!

he is everywhere, he is master of BS, i just ignore his posts, you do the same..
 
Last edited:
2
•••
3
•••
I've also seen nothing to suggest nGTLDs will rank any worse than other TLDs either.

As of Today it should be obvious their is no equal comparison with a .com and a new gtld. Yet here we are Again.

.

.com is given higher rank than others by Google, full stop

Still both articles and Google states that :

  • New gTLDs won’t rank any worse than .com

Please stop speculating!!!
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Back