.us VS .com
-
In general from what I have experienced a location specific extension such as .co.uk geo-targeted to the same location gives the best results when ranking BUT when I look at results from the US, page after page shows results of .com, surely if my above statement is true then a .us domain extension should rank better then a .com.
-
mmm I do agree to disagree from the testing I have done, I have seen better rankings for (emd).co.uk against (emd).org.uk from index.
To the point where .co.uk would rank page 1-3 and .org.uk would rank page 5+
But everyone does things differently, I tend to take .co.uk over anything else when im taking ranking factors into account.
-
I agree with SEOConsult all the way. It's all correlation. In my experience, .us domains tend to be worse (bad content, more ads, less well put together, bad user experience, etc) than .com domains, so I would expect those sites to do worse in the SERPs. It's not the .us domain that's making the sites worse in general. If you put together a terrific .us site, it would do fine.
The main issue I have with .us vs .com and .org.uk vs .co.uk is that people have to remember to enter those extensions. If you have the yourbrand.us domain, a lot of people are going to put yourbrand.com in when trying to get to your site. They may give up there.
Also, I am more likely to trust a .com domain over a .us domain, and I'm more likely to click a .com in the SERPs over a .us domain. Do you have many .us domains you ever visit? I can't think of any off the top of my head. Even del.icio.us migrated to delicious.com.
-
We all have our own views on certain aspects of SEO I guess, however I strongly view all extensions as equal value (unless of-course you're using a .us when targeting a UK audience).
-
What im saying though is if I had a choice between a EMD that was .org.uk or .co.uk I would take the .co.uk every time purely on the bases the extension's 'power' is a lot strong then a .org.uk.
For example if I had 3 new websites with the same template, same content, same title tag with the domain extension (.co.uk, .com, .org.uk) being the only difference, in a UK search im 99% sure the rankings would be as follows:
.co.uk then .com then .org.uk
-
There will be more factors than simply the extension, have you got an example you could send over where you're seeing the EMD .co.uk outranking the .org.uk?
That's correct what you said regarding how Google looks for a GEO within WMT's and then if there's nothing set within WMT's it'll look for other clues, such as the domain extension.
If you have a ccTLD though, Google will set a default location within WMT's that you can't change (there are some ccTLD's that are excempt from this rule, .co.uk and .org.uk aren't excempt though).
-
Thanks,
I understand what your saying that a .com and a .us domain are equal and other factors will determine rankings...
But argument against your statement is how comes a EMD that is .co.uk out ranks a .org.uk 10 fold?
This info sheet from Google imply's geo-targeting in webmaster tools will improve your rankings for the chosen location but also says if no location is specified then the domain extension will be the indicator.
https://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=62399
Cheers
-
Basically, you're focusing on the main correlation (the domain extension) that you can see between all of the points and assuming that's the main factor.
It's nothing to do with the extension that when you're conducting a search, you're only seeing .com's in the results. A .com domain has just as much chance as a .us domain as ranking when targeting in the US.
There are other reason why there's not a .us ranking within the results for the queries that you're searching for, it's just a correlation that you're seeing.
-
Thanks for reply,
Can you put the above in layman terms! Finding it a little hard to decipher (my fault).
-
Correlation not causation - sorry Rand, I stole that phrase from you!
When targeting for the US, a .us domain has just as much chance of ranking as a .com domain has, it's simply a correlation that the results you're seeing down have a .us ranking - not a causation.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Changing a product page from "example.com" to "example.com/keyword" affect SEO and Ranking?
We're in a situation to move the page from "example.com" to "example.com/keyword". And adding new content to the "example.com" page. Does this change affect our ranking? If so how can we overcome this problem? Can anyone help?
On-Page Optimization | | Mohamednatheem0 -
Rel=canonical vs noindex/follow - tabs with individual URLs
Hi everyone I've got a situation that I haven't seen in quite this way before. I would like some advice on whether I should be rel=canonicalzing of noindexing/following a range of pages on a clients website. I've just started working on a website that creates individual URLs for tabs within each page which has resulted in several URLs being created for each listing: Example URLs: hotel-downtown-calgary hotel-downtown-calgary/gallery?tab hotel-downtown-calgary?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/map?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/facilities?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/in-the-area?tab Google has indexed over 1500 pages with the "?tab" parameter (there are 4380 page indexed for the site in total), and also seems to be indexing some of these pages without the "?tab" parameter i.e. ("hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews" instead of "hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab") so the amount of potential duplication could be more. These tabbed pages are getting minimal traffic from organic search, so I've got no issues with taking them out of the index - the question is how. There are the issues I see: Each tab has the same title as the other tabs for each location, so lots of title duplication. Each individual tab doesn't have much content (although the content each tab has is unique). I would usually expect the tabs to be distinguished by the parameters only, not have unique URLs - if that was the case we wouldn't have a duplication issue. So the question is: rel=canonical or noindex/follow? I can see benefits of both. Looking forward to your thoughts!
On-Page Optimization | | Digitator0 -
Duplicate anchor text vs poor relevance in internal links
We're writing a number of blog posts, all based around a particular head-term (call it "women's widgets"). Each post will be centered around a different long-tail keyword (e.g. "women's brandA widgets", "women's brandB widgets", "women's type1 widgets", etc.). We want to link from the blog posts back to the main "women's widgets" category-level page on our site. Should we: a) Use the words "women's widgets" in each blog post and link that to the "women's widgets" page? This would be the most relevant, but it also seems like using the same anchor text on all of the posts, and linking to the main page, is not good since Google doesn't like seeing the same exact anchor text all the time, right? b) Link the long-tail keyword ("women's brandA widgets") to the main "women's widgets" page? That would solve the anchor text duplication issue, but then the anchor text doesn't seem relevant to the page being linked to (it might never mention "brandA" on that main page at all), and I think it would also hurt the blog post's chances of ranking for the long-tail keyword since we're basically saying that there's a more relevant page for that keyword somewhere else (i.e. you shouldn't link out from a page using the phrase you're trying to optimize that page for). c) Link a nearby word/phrase instead? For example, we could say "Trust Companyname.com for your women's widget needs", and link "Companyname.com" to the "women's widget" page. By proximity to the keyword phrase, that may help a bit, but again the relevancy of the anchor text to the page being linked to is fairly low. I'd hate to have a bunch of "click here", "read this" or "company name" anchor texts being used, just in the name of not overusing the head-term in the anchor text. Are we just missing something, or misunderstanding Google's preferences? What do you do when you don't want to overuse a keyword in anchor text, but you still want to link to a main category-level page using the head-term in order to tell Google that that is the most relevant, best page for that keyword? Is anchor text duplication more of a problem for external backlinks, and less of an issue for internal interlinking? Do you have a different suggestion, other than what I outlined above? Thanks for the help!
On-Page Optimization | | BandLeader
John0 -
H2's vs Meta description
in some of my serp results the h2's are showing up instead of the meta description. i have read that H2's arent really valid anymore. can someone clarify this for me?
On-Page Optimization | | dhanson240 -
Keywords vs Tags In Wordpress
Whats the difference between Keywords vs Tags In Wordpress? Also sine meta keywords don't matter in a website do they matter on a blog?
On-Page Optimization | | splashmedia0 -
What are the benefits of targeting one keyword phrase per page vs. multiple keywords per page
What are the benefits of optimizing a page for one keyword phrase versus a group of similar keywords, like this one that Rand posted on another blog entry http://bit.ly/7LzTxY: Ted Baker Ted Baker London Ted Baker Clothing Ted Baker Mens Ted Baker Mens Clothing Ted Baker Mens Collection
On-Page Optimization | | EricVallee340 -
My Domain Name - short vs relevant
I'm creating a website for my new web design company in Vancouver. I'm looking to target such keywords as "Web Design Vancouver", etc. I have another company with a hyphenated domain name which is terrible when I'm on the phone and my client asks me for my domain (hard to say, always spelling it out). Also I wanted to have a good snappy name for my new business so I found a 6 letter .com and matching .ca for my company. My question is: is it best to use a short domain name or is it better have my keywords in the domain name? eg. xyz.com vs xyzvancouverwebdesign.com Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | VebianWebandMobileDevelopment0