information Google says keywords in the TLD part of your URL are ignored for ranking purposes

[sutharshan]

Google’s John Mueller confirmed yesterday in a Google Hangout that keyword-rich TLDs, such as the new top-level domains that have keywords in them — like .LIVE, .NEWS, .ATTORNEY and so on — do not count for ranking purposes. Mueller said Google completely ignores that for ranking purposes.
http://searchengineland.com/google-says-keywords-tld-part-url-ignored-ranking-purposes-251971

 

[Messiah]

Not sure if this means anything with how it works as I'm not an seo/Google pro but my gTLD site is listed #1, left keyword and right keyword without the dot. And of course #1 with the dot too.

Now if I key in just the left of the dot I'm on page #6. I never wanted to be known as just DN therefore page #6 doesn't bother me that much so IMO I'm being ranked where I want to be I guess.

In short I'm #1, keyword name and keyword extension without adding the dot and that's what I wanted.

You would need to understand the volume of traffic where your website is ranking. That means if your website is ranking first, how many search volumes does the keyword have for the month.

Here is your gtld website volume search/month:

It doesn't mean that because of new TLD you are ranking, it might mean that you are ranking because of your anchor text.

 

[GBA]

Maybe Google are right and do not consider the TLD by now. But secondary, this IS clearly an important factor for all established websites.

Go to google.com. Search for "com.space". Check the 1st spot. Oh wait..

 

[deez007]

Go to google.com. Search for "com.space". Check the 1st spot. Oh wait..

What where u expecting? A stand alone domain name to outrank an actual website with content?

 

[Fancy.domains]

Go to google.com. Search for "com.space". Check the 1st spot. Oh wait..

???

Com.space is a domain that not even exists, it's registry reserved.

Of course you have to consider developed and established sites. Try my bangkok test in my last post. You can probably add any keyword as long as there are established sites for each name.

 

[elevator]

If G says it does not give a special consideration for the keyword in the domain for ranking; it does not mean that the domain can not rank. And.if keyword domains or emd ranks it has more advantage than irrelivant domains and it has more clicks tendencies

 

[Dotword]

Possibly true now but does not make sense to prevail long-term.

As has been said, there are examples on the web claiming this kind of SEO information does not always bear out when tested independently.

Also I question the use of the phrase "confirmed" in the OP as in the video John Mueller says "Um as far as I understand it is pretty much completely." and in a way which IMO doesn't shout out that he is the authority on this.

 

[Messiah]

And come on, if searching for "google com", of course the "com" part will be considered.

Let's do a test, search for:

A. "bangkok net"
B. "bangkok org"
C. "bangkok com"
D. "bangkok nu"

The results clearly shows that this is a factor for a website with some age. I know that it's also about the inbound and outbound links, as well as meta data, but anyway. :P

Maybe Google are right and do not consider the TLD by now. But secondary, this IS clearly an important factor for all established websites.

I would disagree here.... By actually typing within the double quotes and mentioning tld next to the keyword, you are actually asking google to show the results relevant to these terms. This means they are going to retrieve based on these terms alone. Here even if you had dot within the term, it would show almost same results. Considering your example, let's take a look.

"bangkok org" About 36,100 results
"bangkok.org" About 36,200 results

"bangkok net" About 18,400 results
"bangkok.net" About 18,400 results

"bangkok com" About 4,68,000 results
"bangkok.com" About 4,68,000 results

"bangkok nu" About 14,600 results
"bangkok.nu" About 14,700 results

If you understand my point, they are not ranking because of their TLD. They are ranking because of their Anchor text and backlinks.

Let's see an example. BuyShoes.com , Buy.Shoes and BuyShoesOnline.com
They all can rank typically same way but making Buy.Shoes backlinks will be easier because it has relevant keyword to us. Also, if you have same natural backlinks/anchor text for BuyShoesOnline.com, it will rank the same way.

As long as I know, GTLDs and NTLDs are not even a ranking factor except CCTLDs where they play major role in showing country specific results.

 

[Fancy.domains]

I would disagree here.... By actually typing within the double quotes and mentioning tld next to the keyword

I did NOT use quotation marks when I searched this. Please, try without.

I can agree on the links and anchor texts. However, the result will be the same for new gTLDs, so the TLD will have an important role for developed sites. At least secondary = in reality. Eg. not many will link to Coffee.club with only the keyword "coffee", they will use "coffee club" as the anchor text.

 

[Messiah]

I did NOT use quotation marks when I searched this. Please, try without.

That's why I said it relevancy. If you type org in your search query, of course it is going to retrieve the results according it. But that doesn't mean it is ranking a website based on that TLD. Or it is giving special treatment to that TLD. It has less volume of search. If you just type Bangkok, it would show Bangkok.com on second or third spot because that website has built the authority already.

I can agree on the links and anchor texts. However, the result will be the same for new gTLDs.

That's exactly I said. There is no special treatment to any TLD whether it is dot COM or dot PIZZA..

 

[HotKey]

Maybe Google are right and do not consider the TLD by now. But secondary, this IS clearly an important factor for all established websites.

Yup agreed, as @deez007 said, spot on. It will be a crucial factor for established sites, espcially ones that have branded specifically to match prefix+suffix with their name. For Google to ignore this is doing the entire new gTLD industry a disservice, and frankly, a step backwards on their part. Lets hope this is just temporary measures as they figure out how to properly deal with the gTLD flood.

Duckduckgo, anyone?

 

[Fancy.domains]

That's why I said it relevancy. If you type org in your search query, of course it is going to retrieve the results according it.

Yes, but then it should be be the same for pizza, as in .PIZZA. Given that the site is, developed and has back links with relevant anchor texts.

Still interesting that Google is giving the TLD zero, or very little, attention for SERP results, even for very niched extensions such as .PIZZA, .YOGA, .LAWYER and so on. No doubt about that. Personally, I think it's strange and a bad move, but there are probably reasons for this.

It will be interesting to follow this...

 

[enlytend]

When it comes to Google, I always treat everything they say as if it's coming from a People magazine reporter. Sometimes it's true, sometimes it BS.

I'm not saying that Google is downright lying about this but I am not saying I believe them either. I will only know for sure when I run a test on my own and see if I can outrank a few sites with using their exact back link structure and more or less the same sort of content targetting the same keywords and the only differentiation with be a relevant TLD

This. The only way to know what works and what doesn't is to test it yourself.

For those who don't know who John Mu is, he's not an official Google "spokesperson." He runs most of their English and German webmaster hangouts - an extension of their webmaster forum, where webmasters can get help with various issues. People submit questions (or participate live), he tries to answer and provide guidance.

He obviously talks to Googlers in other functions, but he doesn't work on the spam team or write algorithms.

Google employees have to toe the party line if they want to keep their jobs. That said, sometimes the way they word things leaves a lot of room for interpretation if you read between the lines.

nyc.autos will only rank for nyc and not autos.
To rank for nyc and autos both keywords need to be to the left of the dot.
2 keyword .com's anyone?

Or just optimize your page for it!!
It isn't all about domains. It isn't that simplistic.
Pages can and do rank for hundreds of keywords - they don't have to be in the domain.

a while back someone did a study on exact matches and found that most of the exact match advantage was seen in .com and .net but not so much in domains like .ws, .info etc.

Don't disregard user behavior. When the url is visible, people are less likely to click on a .biz or .ws than a .com or .net - it's unfamiliar and has less trust. That can influence rankings. Why would they show a result at #1 if nobody appears to want it ?

 

[Bullock]

Ehmmm... interesting, the combo keyword + keyextension doesn't work for Google search!

 

[Veronica Smith]

Good read indeed. Thanks for sharing the info

 

[HotKey]

Or just optimize your page for it!!
It isn't all about domains. It isn't that simplistic.
Pages can and do rank for hundreds of keywords - they don't have to be in the domain.

Agreed. Page content should always be one of the crucial factors in considering search results. I think moving forward though in the search industry, where perhaps folks are looking for specific results in say, a title or business name rather than the actual content (because content does not always reflect a brand), it's time for a new algorithm to be developed. An algorithm that displays varying results, perhaps in two seperate columns, such as keyword title/domain name results and keyword content results.

 

[doubleU]

Ehmmm... interesting, the combo keyword + keyextension doesn't work for Google search!

As my previous example shows this is simply not true and the proof is below :

Example Search :

site:.vision pulsevision

Search Result :

No.1

https://pulse.vision/

 

[GBA]

What where u expecting? A stand alone domain name to outrank an actual website with content?

???

Com.space is a domain that not even exists, it's registry reserved.

Of course you have to consider developed and established sites. Try my bangkok test in my last post. You can probably add any keyword as long as there are established sites for each name.

Wrong example, my bad.

Just tried to prove Google is still looking at extensions. Tried "delicious", and got del.icio.us on 1st spot, I understand, that this is a massive authority website, though. From this point, I think, it's gonna be hard to prove or disprove how is Google treating the new gtlds.

 

[Bullock]

@doubleU

I searched: on Google in this way:

bankaccount.com = 60.400.000
bankaccount.net = 60.400.000
bankaccount.org = 60.400.000

account.bank = 29.300.000 (extension .bank)
account bank = 487.000.000 (without dot)

bank account = 133.000.000
"bank account" = 59.200.000


In conclusion, the results show that Google doesn't consider the keyword extension, rather, it represents a negative factor!

 

[doubleU]

@doubleU

I searched: on Google in this way:

bankaccount.com = 60.400.000
bankaccount.net = 60.400.000
bankaccount.org = 60.400.000

account.bank = 29.300.000 (extension .bank)
account bank = 487.000.000 (without dot)

bank account = 133.000.000
"bank account" = 59.200.000


In conclusion, the results show that Google doesn't consider the extension, indeed, it represents a negative factor!

Your comparing the number of results from a search with two strings, some concatenated with a dot and some not concatenated at all.

This has very little to do with the topic here.

 

[Messiah]

As my previous example shows this is simply not true and the proof is below :

Example Search :
site:.vision pulsevision
Search Result :
No.1
https://pulse.vision/

How many people type Pulse Vision in Google? The keyword search volume is Zero. Do you see its title "Pulse.vision" in Google search results?

With zero search volume, it is pretty easy to rank any website at #1. When the search volume increases, you would need a lot of authority to rank higher. If I had PulseVision.com (or .org /.net any gtld) as developed website and I create a great content,I would rank better than Pulse.Vision pretty easily.

 

[doubleU]

How many people type Pulse Vision in Google? The keyword search volume is Zero. Do you see its title "Pulse.vision" in Google search results?

With zero search volume, it is pretty easy to rank any website at #1. When the search volume increases, you would need a lot of authority to rank higher. If I had PulseVision.com (or .org /.net any gtld) as developed website and I create a great content,I would rank better than Pulse.Vision pretty easily.

Operating from a .com will not give you an SEO advantage or rank you higher than any other TLD for the same keywords.

New gTLDs are not in any way disadvantaged form ranking in search results.

Google recognizes keyword/s both left and right of the dot with the search query.

If search engines operated with this kind of bias then they would be subject to 'Unfair Competition Laws' in particular the EU.

 

[deez007]

@doubleU

I searched: on Google in this way:

bankaccount.com = 60.400.000
bankaccount.net = 60.400.000
bankaccount.org = 60.400.000

account.bank = 29.300.000 (extension .bank)
account bank = 487.000.000 (without dot)

bank account = 133.000.000
"bank account" = 59.200.000


In conclusion, the results show that Google doesn't consider the keyword extension, rather, it represents a negative factor!

I think it's best you actually learn about how Serps work before conducting "research" and coming to a conclusion.

 

[dordomai]

Operating from a .com will not give you an SEO advantage or rank you higher than any other TLD for the same keywords.

New gTLDs are not in any way disadvantaged form ranking in search results.

If search engines operated with this kind of bias then they would be subject to 'Unfair Competition Laws' in particular the EU.

Not true. In the past .info and others were shown to rank less well than .com and .net. They can discount them like they want to. It's just one of many factors though.

Some years back experienced affiliate marketers tried to acquire as many exact match .com for their niches and spent a small fortune doing it.

 

[doubleU]

Not true. In the past .info and other were shown to rank less well than .com and .net. They can discount them like they want to. It's just one of many factors though.

Where are you sourcing this information from ?

 

[dordomai]

Where are you sourcing this information from ?

There were SEO studies done on this in the past. .com and .net exact match did rank better than the "lesser" ones like .info. Not surprising as Google does not want their results to be manipulated and obtaining a .com or .net can be quite costly for good keywords. If anyone could get a boost by buying one of hundreds keyword.whatever it would soon be abused.

if anyone can easily have an exact match it's not worth anything.

what sense would it make to give vacationrentals.com the same weight as vacationrentals.top?

The former is incredibly hard to obtain for a spammer and carries a certain authority the latter could have been bought for $1. Why would an algo not take that into account?

I don't think they have the attitude to invite everyone with their $1 keyword.whatever site and treat it the same as keyword.com when ranking for that keyword.