domain Need some advice her ["HowToMakeLogo.com" - "Onpini.com"]

[cycledomain]

I will be thankful to hear your thoughts and advices about this domains [ "howtomakelogo.com" - "onpini.com" ], what do you think

 

[MKA]

howtomakealogo.com is too long (too many characters, too many syllables, too many words), and too specific. Even if I was looking for a domain like that I would've preferred something like logomaker.com, makealogo.com, designlogo.com, createlogo.com, logoguide.com, etc.

I don't know what "onpini" is, but from a quick Google search there's an artist in New York with that moniker. onpini.com is certainly brandable, and a lot more valuable than howtomakealogo.com. If I owned it I'd reach out to the aforementioned artist and see if he's interested in buying it.

 

[cycledomain]

howtomakealogo.com is too long (too many characters, too many syllables, too many words), and too specific. Even if I was looking for a domain like that I would've preferred something like logomaker.com, makealogo.com, designlogo.com, createlogo.com, logoguide.com, etc.

I don't know what "onpini" is, but from a quick Google search there's an artist in New York with that moniker. onpini.com is certainly brandable, and a lot more valuable than howtomakealogo.com. If I owned it I'd reach out to the aforementioned artist and see if he's interested in buying it.

Thanks for the advice
I know that the domain name "HowToMakeLogo.com" is very long, but I think it is suitable for the subdomain because the amount of searches on those words is very much per month, and this domain will bring many visitors to the site
Don't you think so

 

[MKA]

Exact match domains aren't that relevant anymore since page content is what determines SEO, not the domain name. You're not going to get an bonus for having an exact match domain. John Mueller have clarified this numerous times.

 

[cycledomain]

Exact match domains aren't that relevant anymore since page content is what determines SEO, not the domain name. You're not going to get an bonus for having an exact match domain. John Mueller have clarified this numerous times.

Well, if I want to sell it, what is the suggested or average price in your opinion?

 

[MKA]

I don't think you could sell it to be honest. You could try auctioning it off on Sedo or Godaddy, but I don't think you'll get a single bid.

It's always a good idea to learn the market before you invest. Looking at sales listed on namebio.com can give you a good idea of what people are looking for. Also on this forum you have threads listing perceived undervalued domains for auction that may be worth investing in, and so on....

But as a rule, recent hand registrations are generally worthless, with the exception of newly introduced or popularized terms (but those are hard to catch). Personally I don't bother with hand registrations anymore. I buy and sell.

 

[cycledomain]

I don't think you could sell it to be honest. You could try auctioning it off on Sedo or Godaddy, but I don't think you'll get a single bid.

It's always a good idea to learn the market before you invest. Looking at sales listed on namebio.com can give you a good idea of what people are looking for. Also on this forum you have threads listing perceived undervalued domains for auction that may be worth investing in, and so on....

But as a rule, recent hand registrations are generally worthless, with the exception of newly introduced or popularized terms (but those are hard to catch). Personally I don't bother with hand registrations anymore. I buy and sell.

ok, please can you suggest me some websites to learn the markets

 

[Jordon M.]

Low-xx to High-xx ea.

 

[DealMaker1]

Exact match domains aren't that relevant anymore since page content is what determines SEO, not the domain name. You're not going to get an bonus for having an exact match domain. John Mueller have clarified this numerous times.

This is incorrect. John Mueller did not clarify this several times. I have read several of these articles, and they are full of "can", "could" and "suggest" which is not definitive.

Matt Cutts said 10 years ago they were turning the volume down on keyword-rich domains because people were abusing them. Mueller suggests the same. But the radio is not being turned off entirely. Where the weighting was 60 to 40 ten years ago for keywords it's now about 70 to 30 for brands.

You won't ever see keyword domains disappear. They still have relevance for page 2 to 4 ranking and for parking. What you WILL see is a continued improvement of Google's algorithm to vet out people trying to cheat with keyword domains.

It's clear brands are taking precedence but keyword domains still have lots of value.

Remember "business" is a keyword as well. So are they going to punish business.com for being a keyword domain? Not really. Like it or not, there is no algorithm that can completely get rid of keyword domains...keywords were the foundation of domains, not brands.

Although the second floor, brands, are getting more attention now, the foundation will continue to be.

 

[DealMaker1]

Even if this domain has some good SV, it would still be hard to sell because it's a "how to" educational domain and not a direct sell for a product or service.

Mid $xx

 

[MKA]

This is incorrect. John Mueller did not clarify this several times. I have read several of these articles, and they are full of "can", "could" and "suggest" which is not definitive.

Matt Cutts said 10 years ago they were turning the volume down on keyword-rich domains because people were abusing them. Mueller suggests the same. But the radio is not being turned off entirely. Where the weighting was 60 to 40 ten years ago for keywords it's now about 70 to 30 for brands.

You won't ever see keyword domains disappear. They still have relevance for page 2 to 4 ranking and for parking. What you WILL see is a continued improvement of Google's algorithm to vet out people trying to cheat with keyword domains.

It's clear brands are taking precedence but keyword domains still have lots of value.

Remember "business" is a keyword as well. So are they going to punish business.com for being a keyword domain? Not really. Like it or not, there is no algorithm that can completely get rid of keyword domains...keywords were the foundation of domains, not brands.

Although the second floor, brands, are getting more attention now, the foundation will continue to be.

reddit.com
/r/SEO/comments/sta8hd/how_would_google_rank_the_following_domains/

Question:

"Assume people are interested in "web design" and this is how they would enter it into the Google search bar. The term "web design" is just an example.

How would Google rank the following domains:

1. web-design.com
2. web.design
3. web-design.net

(I don't know what is behind these URLs. It does not matter for my argument. Please don't click.)

I know .com is generally seen as the most valuable domain ending. But what if the term that is searched for ("web design") is identical to the domain, such as in the case of web.design?

Is web.design better than get-web-design.com?

Does anyone have any anecdotal evidence or even statistics to back this up?"

John Mueller:

"No difference. Also no difference if you used sabertoothed-hedgehog.com. Pick a domain name you can build on for the long run. Maybe you're doing web-design now, but what will you do in 5, 10 years? Pick something that lets you grow, or go with a domain name that's more like a brand which you can build out & which people can find you with directly (that would be my recommendation).

Creating separate sites for sub-business-ideas is a hassle, merging sites is a bigger hassle, moving domains is a hassle. All of these things take a lot of time, some money, and more. Go with something you want to keep for longer, which gives you room. There's no secret (or public) SEO-bonus for having your keywords in the domain name.

(and for those coming with "but there are keyword domains ranking well" -- of course, you can also rank well with a domain that has keywords in it. But you can rank well with other domain names too, and a domain won't rank well just because it has keywords in it.)"

................................................................................................................................


And Google has clear instructions on how to optimize your SEO, and nowhere is it suggested that having a good SLD is beneficial for your SEO.

And this makes perfect sense, because your SLD doesn't need to have anything to do with the content of your site, and it makes no sense that your site would receive preferential treatment for having a particular SLD.

That said, Exact Match Domains are (EMD) still valuable. Because back in the day EMD did affect SEO, so people registered the lot of them, locking out non-serious users who weren't willing to give up a small fortune to get one. So the people that did end up using EMD:s were serious end-users that wanted to market their services, which in turn meant that people began to associate EMD:s with quality services, creating a degree of provenance, which has lasted to this day.

There's also the superstition that Search Engine Coordinators like John Mueller are lying about how search engines works. Which has managed to inflate the value quite a bit.

But generally people are moving away from EMD, and instead are looking for short and memorable brand-names.

 

[DealMaker1]

searchenginejournal.com
/google-no-seo-bonus-for-keyword-based-domains/438324/

“How would Google rank the following domains: web-design.com, web.design, web-design.net?”

“No difference. Also no difference if you used sabertoothed-hedgehog.com. “ - John Mueller

And Google has clear instructions on how to optimize your SEO, and nowhere is it suggested that having a good SLD is beneficial for your SEO.

And this makes perfect sense, because your SLD doesn't need to have anything to do with the content of your site, and it makes no sense that your site would receive preferential treatment for having a particular SLD.

That said, Exact Match Domains are (EMD) still valuable. Because back in the day EMD did affect SEO, so people registered the lot of them, locking out non-serious users who weren't willing to give up a small fortune to get one. So the people that did end up using EMD:s were serious end-users that wanted to market their services, which in turn meant that people began to associate EMD:s with quality services, creating a degree of provenance, which has lasted to this day.

There's also the superstition that Search Engine Coordinators like John Mueller are lying about how search engines works. Which has managed to inflate the value quite a bit.

But generally people are moving away from EMD, and instead are looking for short and memorable brand-names.

Sure. I don't think Mueller is necessarily lying but most of his prose are shrouded in nebulous language. Much like Matt Cutts back in the day. You won't get the straightest of answers for obvious reasons.

 

[MKA]

If it will make no difference whether you use sabertoothed-hedgehog.com or web-design.com for a site dedicated to web-design, then SLD doesn't make a difference. In fact it's so unambiguous that I don't even this you could convincingly misinterpret it any way.

Back in the day when the Internet infrastructure was a lot less uniform and crawlers a lot more limited, it made sense to consider every scrap of information you could get about a site, including the SLD. But now it's not necessary, in fact some factors may even be detrimental to desirable search results.

 

[DealMaker1]

If it will make no difference whether you use sabertoothed-hedgehog.com or web-design.com for a site dedicated to web-design, then SLD doesn't make a difference. In fact it's so unambiguous that I don't even this you could convincingly misinterpret it any way.

Back in the day when the Internet infrastructure was a lot less uniform and crawlers a lot more limited, it made sense to consider every scrap of information you could get about a site, including the SLD. But now it's not necessary, in fact some factors may even be detrimental to desirable search results.

I have heard this, but I don't believe it. That's like saying best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com (which has 20 million links) will get the same treatment as business.com (with 0 links, just as an example) for a business site. I'm skeptical.

 

[MKA]

I have heard this, but I don't believe it. That's like saying best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com (which has 20 million links) will get the same treatment as business.com (with 0 links, just as an example) for a business site. I'm skeptical.

The SEO depends on the site, and how it's structured.

If best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com runs a better business site than business.com why shouldn't it be prioritized by a Search Engine for business related searches?

The Search Engine's job is to provide the users with relevant search results, and the SLD has nothing to do with that.

The TLD does matter (and this is also clarified in Google's SEO Guide) where it specifically describes the difference between gTLD and ccTLD, where ccTLD will relieve preferential treatment for searches in their countries. But that makes sense because ccTLD target specific countries, and you can still receive this same bonus with a gTLD by adding the cc as a directory or a subdomain, e.g. example.com/de and de.example.com instead of example.de.

If a EMD gave bonuses then it should be explicit in Google's instructions on how to get a good SEO. Good communication between developers and users is key for a good user-experience.

 

[DealMaker1]

Well, it is obvious from a brand perspective. Which brand is more appealing, best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com or business.com? And don't tell me it doesn't matter because from an aesthetic point of view it DOES matter. Nobody remembers the first and everybody the second.

If what your saying is true, it only proves one thing: that the programmers of the algorithm that should allow best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com ahead of business.com have no common sense. They are working in a black and white world with no in-between...and that's an aweful shame.

 

[MKA]

The Search Engine is not there to promote your brand or fancy domain name. It's there to provide the end-user with relevant sites for their searches, because that's what the end-users are interested in.

That said, people more likely to click on a link that redirects to business.com over one that best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com (because it's shorter and seems more legitimate) which in turn does affect the SEO ranking. But that's an indirect consequence of business.com looking more professional and relevant to the end-user. But this difference can be mitigated by a short professional looking domain name, like risingstar.com.

Think of two hair saloons. One has a snazzy name but provides a subpar service, the other has a terrible name but excellent service. Which would you recommend to your friend?

 

[DealMaker1]

The Search Engine is not there to promote your brand or fancy domain name. It's there to provide the end-user with relevant sites for their searches, because that's what the end-users are interested in.

That said, people more likely to click on a link that redirects to business.com over one that best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com (because it's shorter and seems more legitimate) which in turn does affect the SEO ranking. But that's an indirect consequence of business.com looking more professional and relevant to the end-user. But this difference can be mitigated by a short professional looking domain name, like risingstar.com.

Think of two hair saloons. One has a snazzy name but provides a subpar service, the other has a terrible name but excellent service. Which would you recommend to your friend?

Nah. I will have to disagree with you. Search is there to provide me what I want and not what the programmer wants. Google makes their money from me, the ad clicker. The programmer wants black and white (because they have insatiable square-head), and I want some snaz, as a consumer. The danger with your suggestion is outright robo-dictation ie the programmer is going to start TELLING me what I want. Danger, danger...caution we are nearing the Animal Farm.

The fact business.com looks more relevant and professional IS the reason Google programmers will write their algorithms accordingly. It is in no way indirect. Pretty direct as it comes.

Google can never decipher which is super, sub or par in the physical world. Therein it is different from the real world so that is not an argument. We all have to swallow the fact that sometimes we will be mislead by the people Google is trying to represent. How many times have you gone to a restaurant with a beautiful website, Google claimed as the bomb, and it was shit? Happens to me a lot because I eat out a lot all over the place. And I've been to many restaurants that are page 10 on Google with shitty little sites where the food was extraordinary. So essentially Google has not helped me out. The better thing they did was to provide the directions. As a matter of fact, Google may be doing a huge disservice by indexing a crappy-food restaurant so high and thereby influencing reviews. God forbid someone gets food poisoning because Google says their website is top-notch. C'est une catastrophe!!

In any case, I think risingstar.com is a good domain.

 

[MKA]

The programmer is there to satisfy the end-user's needs. If Google stops producing relevant search results then people will turn to their competitors. The ads are built on top of that, and there's no reason a business site called best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com can't have the same business-related ads as business.com if both are running business-related sites.

But there's not much to debate here. Mueller made it clear that web-design.com and sabertoothed-hedgehog.com will rank the same for the subject of web-design. So unless you want to accuse John Mueller of lying or being misleading then you have to accept that the SLD has no direct impact on the search results.

The reason I picked risingstar.com is because it's satisfies the base-criteria for brand-domain: ≤10 letters and ≤3 syllables, but it's not specific enough to where it has to be associated with business, but it gives the same impression as something like microsoft.com or mastercard.com is going to give. So people are not going to be as wary of clicking on it like they may be for an odd domain like best-news-today-and-tomorrow.com.

 

[DealMaker1]

Google has no competitors.

I accuse John Mueller of lying.

I was joking about risingstar.com.

Let's move on, shall we?

 

[MKA]

Google has plenty of competitors: Bing, Duckduckgo, Yahoo, Brave, etc. Just because Google is on top doesn't mean that it can't lose its end-users to competitors, and in order to prevent that they have to provide a better end-user experience.

If you want to baselessly accuse John Mueller of lying that's fine as well. But unless you can provide well-researched case to back up your position, don't expect people to take your accusations seriously.

Your opinions aside, risingstar.com is a good domain. It meets the base criteria for a brand while simultaneously giving the impression of future success.

 

[DealMaker1]

If you have ever done ads, you will clearly see Google has no competitors.

The definition of nebulous is something vague or cloudy. And yes, Mueller and most others in this industry can be accused this. And good for them. The more they can hornswoggle people the better. I don't have a problem with this. But facts are facts. Don't need a public court of law to tell me so. All the power to them. They just love you because you click their ads and you are getting usually very little in return...in terms of money. All the power to them. No problems here.

 

[MKA]

You're either engaging in misleading hyperbole or you're living under a rock, there are plenty of alternatives to Google: Taboola, Ezoic, Adversal, Amazon, etc. it's a huge industry, and there's always going to be competition.

What he said was not nebulous, it's clear as day. SLD does not affect SEO, full stop. If you want to engage in conspiracy theories you're free to do that, but there's a real risk that you will misinform other members, leading them to making bad financial decisions.

 

[DealMaker1]

You're either engaging in misleading hyperbole or you're living under a rock, there are plenty of alternatives to Google: Taboola, Ezoic, Adversal, Amazon, etc. it's a huge industry, and there's always going to be competition.

What he said was not nebulous, it's clear as day. SLD does not affect SEO, full stop. If you want to engage in conspiracy theories you're free to do that, but there's a real risk that you will misinform other members, leading them to making bad financial decisions.

I have done them all. All of those ad platforms. Have you?

Google rules them all. That's how they make their money.

No conspiracy theories. Only facts. For centuries people hide trade secrets. Here we have nothing different. And that is ok. I actually recommend their practice.

I'm not interested in misinformation. We are all adults here. If you want to believe shit, that is your right.

 

[MKA]

I have done them all. All of those ad platforms. Have you?

Google rules them all. That's how they make their money.

No, these are different companies. They're all offering this service, and they're all sustainable. In fact, Google AdSense lost users last year, while Amazon gained users.

And assuming that what you said is true, your personal experiences with these companies don't matter, because if that was true the listed competitors wouldn't have clients, and consequently not exist.

No conspiracy theories. Only facts. For centuries people hide trade secrets. Here we have nothing different. And that is ok. I actually recommend their practice.

No, it's baseless speculation on your part. There's no evidence to back up what you have to say. On top of that, as Google's leading Search Engine Coordinator, John Mueller is legally liable for what he has to say on the subject. So if there were trade secrets pertaining to the benefits SLD:s he shouldn't be talking about it at all...but he does.

I'm not interested in misinformation. We are all adults here. If you want to believe shit, that is your right.

I'm getting the impression that you're emotionally invested in being right here. Maybe your portfolio in large part consists of Exact Match Domains, and you don't want to accept that a substantial part of them may be worthless (or at the very least not as valuable as you thought they were), and if that's the case then that's regrettable. But you shouldn't propagate unsubstantiated claims to users looking for financial advice.