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

[atinc]

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.

 

[atinc]

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!

 

[Brandworthy]

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.

 

[RamBabuSEO]

You’re going to see some headlines today about an SEO study commissioned by The Domain Name Association (DNA). Some of these headlines might suggest that new top level domain names get some sort of search engine boost over .com domains. It’s not quite that simple.
http://www.thedna.org/resources/seo-study/

 

[HotKey]

Great thread and thanks. Given the nature of nGTLD's, being so keyword-rich, they are practically self-optimized for search results. It makes the engines have to work that much less when filtering for specific queries from users. nGTLD's are a dream for Google and DuckDuckGo and others. Actually, DuckDuckGo took advantage of the dot-span with G's to bring results to the top of results long before Google did, so props to them.

The higher pricing of the new G's also make them less susceptible to content trickery that the older .com extension fell prey to. A new gTLD website will be seen as more authoritative and trustworthy, eg if someone sees Make.Coffee in their result from a "how to make coffee" query. The link alone is enough to grab attention. Over the years most .coms have been thoroughly abused enough to mislead users to empty or useless content.

 

[enlytend]

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)

 

[amirp]

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

I call it B.S

 

[atinc]

he is everywhere, he is master of BS, i just ignore his posts, you do the same..

I can`t help myself Amirp.

There are so many new domainers reading these comments and most of them are misled by false dot com prophets.

The fact that dot com is way older than new gTLDs and there are more dot com investors (who are looking forward to sell their dot coms to newcomers) than new gTLD investors in the industry.

So they see more comments from dot com investors who are speculating on new gTLDs and believing their misleading statements which led them to invest on non-sense domains both in aftermarket and hand regs.

I am suggesting newcomers should search and invest on generic and exact match new gTLDs when there are still bunch of them available to register on this side of the industry.

Sometimes it is frustrating to answer them since there are 10 or more members who are constantly attacking on any good news related to new gTLDs, at the same time and guess what they are mostly the same people. This is why I call them false dot com prophets.

If you go and see their profiles and look for the areas tab that showing in which categories they are commenting on, you would be surprised!!!

Most of their comments are on new gTLDs side while their investments are strictly on dot com!

 

[deez007]

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

Hogwash.. Full stop

 

[rahulmajgaonkar]

Informative Thread! Marked for Notification Updates.

 

[dordomai]

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

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.

 

[enlytend]

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.

 

[amirp]

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..

 

[atinc]

How has that worked out so far for you? And should people take investment advice from people not selling anything?

I got no shame to say I have no sales so far, it is better and more royal than reporting fake sales or claiming you had very good sales without given much information on the forum.

You can easily make a whois check, you would see all my new gTLDs are registered in late 2016 or 2017.

I am not looking forward to sell them now cause I don`t see myself as a domain trader but I am domain Investor.

Hope you know what investment stands for.

Also comparing your sales with newly registered domains is nonsense.

You might be selling your domains that you own for 5+ years.

It shouldn`t give anyone the idea that dot com is more successful cause you are not comparing them in equal sense.

 

[JB Lions]

You’re going to see some headlines today about an SEO study commissioned by The Domain Name Association (DNA). Some of these headlines might suggest that new top level domain names get some sort of search engine boost over .com domains. It’s not quite that simple.
http://www.thedna.org/resources/seo-study/

http://www.thedna.org/the-dna-leadership/ - bunch of registries/registrars

"Our first priority is to educate Internet users around the world about the new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) that will be released through ICANN’s New gTLD Program. "

Registries and registrars wanting to sell new gtlds. The graphic is dated, seo agency is now at the bottom of page 2 for me.

As far as search engines, you can rank with any extension.

 

[RamBabuSEO]

http://www.thedna.org/the-dna-leadership/ - bunch of registries/registrars

"Our first priority is to educate Internet users around the world about the new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) that will be released through ICANN’s New gTLD Program. "

Registries and registrars wanting to sell new gtlds. The graphic is dated, seo agency is now at the bottom of page 2 for me.

As far as search engines, you can rank with any extension.

Agreed on this - Registries and registrars they want to see but they also come up to let audiences know advantages of new gTLD as these can influence in search more positively than .Com . It's not concrete proof right now in the market, all are mostly based on stats which reacted ranking high with these extension somehow.

Also, awareness is a big weak point regard to getting gTLD popularity, but I am pretty sure as it is slightly moving up and building some ground to stand on very competitive market soon!

We can rank higher with relating search term with more demanding, useful and relevant to the audiences.

 

[amirp]

I almost always look to see who is behind a case study to see if there is a possible conflict of interest and biasness. Doesn't mean I don't read it just means I need to independently verify not just believe what I read.[/QUOTE]

exactly .. all gtld haters are heavy investing in .com and they are protecting their own interest in any way they can

 

[atinc]

Its already been almost 3 years, Holding new G's for another 3 to 5 years just to see what happens? If I wanted to gamble I'd go to Vegas. Best of wishes regardless of your investments. Signing out.

This is so disrespectful..

Calling other`s investment, gambling.

It is non-sense.

Do you know if the domain you invest will sell for sure 100% ?

It doesn`t mean that if you are buying dot com you are not gambling.

There are so many different variables.

There are hundreds of new gTLDs and 3 years is not a base start for all the extensions.

There have been some example where a new gTLD beat up the price of a 3 letter .com.

How long did .com been around? But here is a new gTLD, casino.online worth more than it.(mng.com)

It doesn`t mean that every new gTLD will sell more than a 3L.com

- it is all about quality...

 

[atinc]

It does, you're the one not reading. The jacksonville attorney example I linked to is one of the examples used in Article #1. Take the examples used, do a Namepros search on them.

I read the thread and the article shared on it.

You should do the same.



Plus, if you like to make any statements just make a statement cause I don`t see your point here.

 

[JB Lions]

I read the thread and the article shared on it.

You should do the same.



Plus, if you like to make any statements just make a statement cause I don`t see your point here.

Here's another one about the 3d carat diamonds joke of a study, again, what you posted Article #1 - https://www.namepros.com/threads/bill-hartzers-seo-and-the-not-com-revolution-presentation.957691/

What you're bolding - "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."

In nonsense, if you read the link I posted.

"In addition to the relaunch, Eric’s team concentrated on posting blog entries (initially about seven per month) containing keywords they hadn’t yet been ranked on search results":

added more CONTENT

 

[atinc]

Article #2

"As for whether there is an SEO benefit from having a new TLD, as of now it’s anyone’s guess."

It's because it has lots of backlinks, owned by Coffee.org which has an affiliate program as well, plus actual content etc.

The first example, jacksonville attorney, again - https://www.namepros.com/threads/domains-vs-pay-per-click-do-new-tlds-work.938673/#post-5468110

They were already ranking on the .com, they added new content

Also jacksonville.attorney, guess what? Forwards to a .com now

Again, this is what you bolded, trying to push:

"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."

The one case he was talking about was jacksonville attorney. The author and you left out the other stuff they did, again, added new content.

You are hopeless @JB Lions

Read the article #2 appropriately, he clearly says it is not because of the backlinks since it was only mentioned "coffee.club: not "coffee club" and guess how google proceeded it?

On the other hand, He said "in both cases", not just about jacksonville.attorney, yet you can`t stop yourself from speculating as always.( Also you are using a different link than the one I provided where people can find the real full content.)

Also in which scenario do you forward a domain to another?

When there is no enough attraction, and you need more attraction from other`s type-ins.

Be Careful he is not forwarding dot com to a new gTLD he is forwarding a new gTLD to a dot com.

Yet you can`t understand it, don`t you, or you just avoid the facts as you always does when it comes to new gTLDs.

 

[atinc]

Bashing? Drastic much?

And my sales haven't suffered, best year so far. You on the other hand, no sales. Even dropping links in your post.

You actually haven't addressed any of the issues brought up.

I linked to 2 different threads here going thru some of the examples used in the articles you posted. You didn't touch any of the points brought up.

Lol, Man you calling this drastic?

I post two SEO expert`s articles and see what kind of crab you are coming with.

Drastic, indeed.

 

[Brands.International]

I wish we could have this thread cleaned a little bit by mods ..

It was such a good idea by @atinc to discuss SEO practices with new gTLDs, as it certainly would be very useful for all new gTLD investors..and now this thread becomes again totally unreadable....oh yeah..

 

[atinc]

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

 

[Brandworthy]

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.