Niche directories still offer link building potential

I’ll get straight to the point - directory submission as a way to help improve your search engine presence is entirely dependent on your strategy.

The easiest trap anyone doing directory submission can make is to simply go for large scale directory submission services.

The problem here is that such services are pushing for quantity, not quality, and it’s a quantity that you can assume to be effectively worthless.

A major problem is that anyone can set up a directory, anyone does set up a directory, and there is an awful lot of churn in the directory listings market.

There are also a lot of directories that were set up for link farming purposes only, and just send out big red flags to Google.

Additionally, a few bright sparks set up multiple clone directories powered by the same database on the same server. Big numbers, but presume zero link value.

Case in point - 18 months ago I had a test site mass submitted to at least 100 directories - could even have been 200 directories.

It never ranked for any significant keywords from this process.

A year later I ran a link check on Yahoo! - and found only 15 links still found.

And these couldn’t even get the domain to PR1.

Conclusion? Mass directory submission is a waste of time and money.

Google’s war on directories

Directories have always been seen as a simple and accessible way to get links.

Additionally, in the summer of 2004, Google briefly gave directories something of a boost - probably relating to hub factor scoring.

The result was an explosion in the number of directories that became available - the majority of which of course no longer exist.

It also demonstrated to Google that if they wanted to reduce manipulation of the links aspect of their ranking algo, they’d better come down pretty hard on directories to limit their influence.

The result has been a periodic assault on directories by Google.

The main strategy appears to have been to try and devalue generic directories slowly but surely, so while human users could gain some benefit (if they ever visited the directory), the webmasters would probably see little link love.

> The first way to do this was to devalue any networks, such as when Google made the DMOZ category for web directories a PR0.

> A more subtle method almost certainly involves duplicate content filtering. The same submissions to any number of directories is going to create blocks of duplicate text. There is already plenty of evidence that Google can analyse the context of text on a page.

> And then there’s a typical directory page structure, which means it shouldn’t be impossible for Google’s algorithmic processes to put 2 + 2 together for filtering purposes.

> Google have also periodically shot down any high flying directories that may be perceived as buying in PageRank to resell listings, as John Scott’s BlueFind directory famously got penalised for.

> And then there’s the link equity issue - someone creates a big site, such as a directory with thousands of categories - which Google then fail to index and cache because there’s not enough real link juice to spread about the pages.

So the situation is clear - because directories are so accessible for basic link building purposes, Google have made a point of applying the brake in terms of their value.

Directories as a link building resource

You’d think at this point directories as a link building tool are therefore not much attention, and I’ll be honest here - I regard link building via directories not as a core strategy, but a peripheral strategy to supplement more effective methods.

So if a site is worth submitting to directories, it’s worth doing right - and that means developing a targeted list based on quality criteria.

There are a number of lists about - Bob Mutch has a nice directory list to start with, which sifts a whole load of wheat from the chafe.

A directory’s usefulness for link work isn’t the Toolbar PageRank value, or the number of links to it - it’s a combination of authority of factors such as domain age and source of links, as Bob tries to illustrate with .gov and .edu sources.

I’ve also additionally written up a list of personal favourite directories, plus the ill-fated Aviva has a list of strongest directories based on the SEOmoz link strength tool.

None of these offer a fool-proof system, but by focusing on authority issues - which remain integral to Google - then even should your submitted links be devalued by Google, they can end up on pages with actual traffic - the original purpose of a directory.

Niche directories - an untapped resource

So far we’ve covered generic directories, mainly targeted at webmasters and small businesses.

But you really should try and root out niche directories based on your site topic. Try to avoid domains which are set up just as a directory, but instead look for information sites which happen to also include a directory on the domain.

These aren’t necessarily going to be so easy to find, but if you do, you could tap into serious value.

Niche sites can develop incredibly strong traffic streams, so there always remains a chance that of real human traffic value - so don’t fret if the links are redirected or nofollowed.

Of course, if live links are offered, then strong keyword association between the host site’s topic, pages, and your target domain, could work handsomely.

Unfortunately, there are few really useful resources on niche directories, not least because - well, there’s such a huge range of niches available that it would be difficult to build a comprehensive resource on these.

However, if you’re in the UK at least, Dave Eaves has set up a list of some of the best UK web directories.

So run searches on Google in your niche for your keywords, such as “keyword” +”directory” and see what you can find. If you can find it listed reasonably well on Google, the chances are you’ve found a site of value.

Directories as a link building strategy

Firstly, let’s determine our goals for link building with directories:

1. For indexing the target site
2. To create some value links
3. To generate some traffic

We’re not going to use directories to try and link bomb Google - what we are taking is a mild approach for the long term, where links on well established and reasonably authoritative websites are going to offer some potential link value, some potential traffic value, and multiple points of entry for indexing.

Go through some of the links above, such as Bob Mutch’s and the Aviva lists, and select relevant directories from there.

Additionally, run a search on Google for niche directories in your sector.

Importantly, vary your link title, descriptions, and keywords for all of your submissions.

Conclusion

Directories offer an accessible way for a webmaster to get links, but directories are chased by devaluation issues - which means they cannot be regarded as a strong link building resource.

Therefore you need to bear in mind that directory submission is a limited way to link develop for a website.

However, if you properly target the directories you submit to, by aiming for strong generic directories, and good niche directories, then you should be able to develop a nice mix of links that carry link juice and links that deliver traffic.

Because most directories are relatively inexpensive to submit to, in the long term this means they really can deliver a decent return on investment.

All the more reason to focus on quality, not quantity, of submissions.

The key point is to do your research, and not get lazy - after all, if you are really going to invest time and money into submitting any website to directories, you may as well try and do it properly.