.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
-
Hreflang Errors 404 vs "Page Not Found"
For a websites that differ between catalogs (PDPs) what hreflang error causes the least harm? Obviously the best solution is to only have hreflang for shared products, but this takes more work to implement. So when no identical product exists... 1. Hreflang points to 404 or 410 error. 2. Hreflang points to 200 status "Page Not Found" page. This obviously has the additional issue of needing to point back to 100+ urls. I want to avoid having Google decide to ignore all hreflang due to errors as many correct urls will exist. Any thoughts?
On-Page Optimization | | rigelcable0 -
Unique Pages with Thin Content vs. One Page with Lots of Content
Is there anyone who can give me a definitive answer on which of the following situations is preferable from an SEO standpoint for the services section of a website? 1. Many unique and targeted service pages with the primary keyword in the URL, Title tag and H1 - but with the tradeoff of having thin content on the page (i.e. 100 words of content or less). 2. One large service page listing all services in the content. Primary keyword for URL, title tag and H1 would be something like "(company name) services" and each service would be in the H2 title. In this case, there is lots of content on the page. Yes, the ideal situation would be to beef up content for each unique pages, but we have found that this isn't always an option based on the amount of time a client has dedicated to a project.
On-Page Optimization | | RCDesign741 -
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 -
.com vs .co.uk domain
I have a client who has a site live at example**.co.uk** and would like to rank for the term "example". But example**.com** is owned by another company who offers a different product and service and has been live since 2003. I know that I can make example**.co.uk** rank for keywords related to their service but I think it's going to be a struggle to get them to rank for the brand term "example" as the .com site already owns Page 1 with their domain name, Facebook page, Wiki page etc etc. The only variation is that example**.com** is a US based company and my client want to ranks in the UK only. What are the chances I can out rank example**.com** for the brand term on www.google.co.uk if example**.com** currently owns Page 1 on google**.co.uk**?
On-Page Optimization | | Marketing_Today0 -
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 -
Blog on Subdomain vs. Subdirectory - Best Practices
Hi, I have recently been told that it no longer impacts authority or rankings if a blog is set up on a subdomain (blog.domain.com) rather than a subdirectory (/blog). However, I am reluctant to do so because I remember learning how blog subdomains did not adhere to SEO best practices. Would anyone be able to shed some light on the latest SEO best practices regarding this topic? Many thanks, Erin
On-Page Optimization | | HiddenPeak0 -
Different pages for OS's vs 1 Page with Dynamic Content (user agent), what's the right approach?
We are creating a new homepage and the product are at different stages of development for different OS's. The value prop/messaging/some target keywords will be different for the various OS's for that reason. Question is, for SEO reasons, is it better to separate them into different pages or use 1 page and flip different content in based on the user agent?
On-Page Optimization | | JoeLin0 -
Guest vs Logged In Content
Hi Mozzers I have a client that recently launched a q&a and he has the answers hidden by registering for free you can see the answers. It's a free community. Now the question comes: Google will not get the entire page only the question content which I think is bad. What option would solve the issue. Have thought about making the answers hidden through css... so if you're a guest the answers are display:none . But it has to be a better option than dirty things like this 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | mosaicpro0