EMD still works?
-
Hello guys!
i´m wondering what is your opinion about EMD, they still working like they did in the past??
Thanks in advance
Br
-
Wow, nice answers! Thanks to all!!
-
To add to what the other's have said... EMD's work better for churn and burn/ranking for a single keyword. If you plan on building a online brand/long term website, use a more branded domain (unless the EMD is real sexy).
-
Completely agree with Kemp & Ruge on this one.
We happened to work in the travel industry and we often see well known, branded sites like TripAdvisor outrank sites like (keyword)hotels.com. The EMD sites often still perform well, but having an EMD is in no way a foot in the door for rankings.
The main focus should be on whether or not you site contains relevant and up to date content on the topic at hand.
-
It doesn't work like it did in the past, and google has made all sorts of statements about being more "brand" focused, like say Zappos.com as opposed to shoes.com. I still see EMD's ranking well across the board, but there are a number of reasons for that beyond just the name. And, even still, they don't dominate the way they did years ago.
At least, that's what I have observed.
Best,
- Ruben
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Why is it still effective to manually create backlinks?
Hi I'm the manager of a training site
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jamalinani
My question is why buying backlinks is still effective
Except Google has stated that it will penalize sites that buy backlinks0 -
Authorship Photo Not showing. Done all checks still photo not coming
Can someone suggest - authorship photo not showing - have asked this earlier too but did not get much response on it Site URL http://www.mycarhelpline.com/index.php?option=com_easyblog&view=entry&id=93&Itemid=91 http://www.mycarhelpline.com/index.php?option=com_latestnews&view=detail&n_id=479&Itemid=10 Google + https://plus.google.com/109551624336693902828/posts Have done checks :- ?rel=author at end of profile url on site - Yes Profile discovery option on in Google+ - yes Contributor link in Google+ - yes Email validation done - yes Photo fitted in size - yes Rich snippet showing authorship established with photo - yes still the photo not coming in for last 6 months now. Any suggestion pls Even on searching name 'Gagan Modi' - the photo do show in Search result of google plus profile. But rich snippet as author photo do not show in for the site.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Modi0 -
Are directory listings still appropriate in 2013? Aren't they old-style SEO and Penguin-worthy?
We have been reviewing our off-page SEO strategy for clients and as part of that process, we are looking at a number of superb info-graphics on the subject. I see that some of current ones still list "Directories" as being part of their off-page strategy. Aren't these directories mainly there for link-building purposes and provide Users no real benefit? I don't think I've ever seen a directory that I would use, apart for SEO research. Surely Google's Penguin algorithm would see directories in the same way and give them less value, or even penalise websites that use them to try to boost page rank? If I were to list my websites on directories it wouldn't be to share my lovely content with people that use directories to find great sites, it would be to sneakily build page rank. Am I missing the point? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Crumpled_Dog
Scott0 -
Syndicated content outperforming our hard work!
Our company (FindMyAccident) is an accident news site. Our goal is to roll our reporting out to all 50 states; currently, we operate full-time in 7 states. To date, the largest expenditure is our writing staff. We hire professional
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Wayne76
journalists who work with police departments and other sources to develop written
content and video for our site. Our visitors also contribute stories and/or
tips that add to the content on our domain. In short, our content/media is 100% original. A site that often appears alongside us in the SERPs in the markets where we work full-time is accidentin.com. They are a site that syndicates accident news and offers little original content. (They also allow users to submit their own accident stories, and the entries index quickly and are sometimes viewed by hundreds of people in the same day. What's perplexing is that these entries are isolated incidents that have little to no media value, yet they do extremely well.) (I don't rest my bets with Quantcast figures, but accidentin does use their pixel sourcing and the figures indicate that they are receiving up to 80k visitors a day in some instances.) I understand that it's common to see news sites syndicate from the AP, etc., and traffic accident news is not going to have a lot of competition (in most instances), but the real shocker is that accidentin will sometimes appear as the first or second result above the original sources??? The question: does anyone have a guess as to what is making it perform so well? Are they bound to fade away? While looking at their model, I'm wondering if we're not silly to syndicate news in the states where we don't have actual staff? It would seem we could attract more traffic by setting up syndication in our vacant states. OR Is our competitor's site bound to fade away? Thanks, gang, hope all of you have a great 2013! Wayne0 -
It looks to me like crap still wins
Wherever you look, you see experts advising people not to use automated tools. To do things the right way. That a website with good content will win over a site with tons of junky links. So I came to seomoz for some enlightenment. I have a website that I created, it gets an A here on the website auditor. I have written over fifty completely original articles. I am barely making spot 10 in and out. The sites that are ranking are terrible. Some have one post, have completely wrong information, have pasted the product page as their own. Have no privacy page, contact page etc. Many of them are in broken English and full of misspellings. So I go the Open Site Explorer here and what do i find? Seomoz has it right on the nose. The site authority,linking domains etc are highest for the #1 site, #2 etc. So I examine the links and what do I find? Quality backlinks? Authority backlinks? Hardly. I find completely junk links, that were made with xrumer or scrapebox . Russian bride sites, completely unrelated to the niche. Backlinks that were purchased on Fiverr. These are the types of backlinks Ive avoided. The kind the experts say to stay away from. Yet these people are making serious money with lousy websites and lousy backlinks. Ive looked at others and its the same thing. Content is king? I dont think so. It looks to me like I SHOULD be making tons of these lousy links. Im not sure what direction to go in at this point. So Id like to hear some suggestions.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vansy0 -
Here's some more proof white hat SEO works
I guess this is the most logical place to share this with you. I do SEO for many sites. I've recently been focusing on two in particular for the same client. We used Netfirms SEO services to get links--he insisted--which basically consists of writing articles in broken English and placing them all over blog networks with our desired anchor text. On the other site, I simply refused to employ those services. This was the client's main site, and was way too important to mess around with. I built links myself, the legit way. Long story short, for months I watched the shady, black hat site climb and climb in the SERPs, while the white hat one kept falling. This morning, I checked my SEOmoz campaigns and my white hat site went from #8 to #2 and my black hat site went from page 2 to no longer being in the top 50. Just another example of what's been happening with Google lately and how great it is. Interestingly, the black hat site never got a warning in GWT about buying links. Now I just have to figure out a way to break the news to my boss and tell him I told him so without actually using those words.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | UnderRugSwept5 -
EXPERT CHALLENGE: What link building strategies do YOU think will work after the latest 3/29/2012 Google algorithm change?
FOR ALL SEO THOUGHT LEADERS...What link building strategies do YOU think will work after the latest 3/29/2012 Google algorithm change? NOTE: My hope is that the responses left on this thread will ultimately benefit all members of the community and give recognition to the true thought leaders within the SEO space. That being said, my challenge is a 2 part question: With the 80/20 rule in mind, and in light of recent algorithm changes, what would YOU focus most of your SEO budget on if you had to choose? Let's assume you're in a competitive market (ie #1-5 on page 1 has competitors with 20,000+ backlinks - all ranging from AC Rank 7 to 1). How would you split your total monthly SEO budget as a general rule? Ex) 60% link building / 10% onsite SEO / 10% Social Media / 20% content creation? I realize there are many "it depends" factors but please humor us anyways. Link building appears to have become harder and harder as google releases more and more algorithm changes. For link building, the only true white hat way of proactively generating links (that I know of) is creating high quality content that adds value to customers (ie infographics, videos, etc.), guest blogging, and Press Releases. The con to these tactics is that you are waiting for others to find and pick up your content which can take a VERY long time, so ROI is difficult to measure and justify to clients or C-level management. That being said, how are YOU allocating your link building budget? Are all of these proactive link building tactics a waste of time now? I've heard it couldn't hurt to still do some of these, but what are your thoughts and what is / isn't working for you? Here they are: A. Using spun articles edited by US based writers for guest blog content B. 301 Redirects C. Social bookmarking D. Signature links from Blog commenting E. Directory submissions F. Video Submissions G. Article Directory submissions H. Press release directory submissions I. Forum Profile Submissions J. Forum signature links K. RSS Feed submissions L. Link wheels M. Building links (using scrapebox, senukex, etc.) to pages linked to your money site N. Links from privately owned networks (I spoke to an SEO company that claims to have over 4000 unique domains which he uses to boost rankings for his clients) O. Buying Contextual Text Links All Expert opinions are welcomed and appreciated 🙂
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seoeric2