I am totally confused about the status of directories as far as helping promote any given site. I do understand that content is king and that IBLs and blogs are all part of the SEO mix. What is confusing me is how some directories have lost their – dare I say it - PoweR as far as the search engines are concerned.
I watched last year with great interest when Mr Cutts told the world that Google would be “doing something about paid link directories” – what is the definition of a paid link directory and who decides what is good and what is bad?
Surely Google is the biggest one, with their Adwords programme.
Why do some directories have PoweR and others lose it?

Typically, this situation arises when submitting to niche directories. Quite simply, if you're paying to get listed, it's a paid directory and may not be of much value in the eyes of the search engines.

That's not to say that opting for the free submission option isn't of any value either, I use these all the time. Given that we should be active in our link building campaigns, it's a great option. You'll get a link eventually and it'll give you a bit of a break a month or two down the road.

It's not necessarily a bad idea to pay for a "speedy review" in order to get your site listed in a directory that's undoubtedly going to generate some traffic, but take a few minutes to look around and evaluate the value you'll receive for your money.

These are some of the things you might want to consider in evaluating the value of a paid or "quick review" listing:

• Are most of your biggest competitors listed there? (There might be some ROI in a paid listing.)
• Does the site see a lot of legitimate, repeat traffic?
• Would it be interesting to a casual user who might have stumbled across it accidentally?
• Does it have page rank that's equal to or higher than your site?
• Is page rank being passed without restriction? (have they inplemented the "rel-nofollow" attribute in listings or pages?)
• Will you be able to specify the section of the directory in which your site will be listed?
• Are there more than 30 outbound links from the listings being displayed on each page?
• How established is the site? Are you sure they'll still be around 6 or 10 months down the road?
• Does it appear well maintained? Are there broken links, JavaScript or database errors?
• Can you contact the site Administrator?
• Are you able to find any information using a search similar to "directory reviews" and the name of the directory?
• Do they provide links to pr0n, w@rez, gambling or other undesirable sites that might reflect poorly on you?
• Do they permit you to provide the listing title text and listing description for the link that they'll post to your site?
• Is it a niche directory that services your particular clientele?
• Do they permit "deep links" to pages in your site other than the home page?
• Do they provide link "profile" pages which you might find beneficial in promoting your site?
• Do searches performed in search engines commonly return listings from this particular directory?
• Using the "site:" search operator in Google, do they have lots of pages in the index?
• Using the "link:" search operator in Google, do they have lots sites linking to them? (inbound links)

Over time, spending a few bucks can bring in qualified traffic which will undoubtedly consist of motivated customers. Consider that before you opt for the more expensive "instant review" or the most expensive "premiere listing" options.

Try to balance your link building efforts to include a few free links from article submissions, forums, blogs and niche directories. You might also want to trade a few links with reputable and related websites as well.

Ultimately, just don't overdo it. A few paid listings in reputable directories won't hurt and may result in sustained traffic. Be sure to get your business listed in any local government business directory you can. They're usually free and lend unprecedented credibility to your site.

Realistically, I think it's all about ROI and your bottom line. While your site may not be penalized for listing in hundreds of paid directories, they'll just end up being filtered out of search results anyway, so don't go tossing out your hard earned cash on mass submission services.

.02

__________________
.
Printer ink & toner cartridges in Canada | Integrated Web Payroll, Online HRMS Tools with Employee Time & Attendance

It's hard to say how google looks at this. If you have to pay a fee to get your site reviewed, and there is no free choice, well, damn, that sounds like a paid link to me. If you're just paying for higher placement in a search engine friendly directory that also allows free listings (ones that aren't nofollow) then it might be argued you're paying for placement and not for the link itself.

Personally, I think that other than very good and specific niche directories, that the day of a directory playing an important role in promoting a site are over. Certainly general directories have little value these days.

There are many other ways to promote a site. And many better ways to get good quality one way inbound links.

__________________
Custom Templates for ZenCart, CubeCart, ModX, Movable Type, Joomla, Tolranet Directory, J-Board and more! Need an Alternative to Ebay? Let's talk!

Rule of thumb

If you are opting into a link directory and that directory uses an automated process then consider it a bad investment and don't waste your time.

If the directory you are paying for inclusion uses a manual review system like Joe Ant, then count it a good investment and worth your while.

I am not saying that manual reviews are beyond corruption (DMOZ), what I am saying is that the search engines are less likely to discount the editorial process of a human edited directory.

A similar thought should be applied to reciprocated link trading...

__________________
You can lead a blonde to reason but you can't make her think!

A determination as to what is and is not a "paid" directory listing is really quite straightforward.

If payment is for a review with an eye towards possible inclusion, i.e. if inclusion is not guaranteed by virtue of payment alone, then any resulting listing is not a paid listing.

As for the authority assigned to directory listings, SEs evaluate each on its own merits, taking into consideration such factors as the relevancy of the listings contained within that directories various categories, and the extent to which listings a vetted prior to inclusion.

Even a "free" directory can be taken to have low authority if anyone can get any listing placed merely by virtue of its being submitted.

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Which authority stated this? And where?

__________________
Custom WordPress Themes, CubeCart templates, ModX templates, Movable Type templates. ~ B1tchslappin Political Blog ~ GreenSpeak Community Action

Merriam-Webster

Main Entry: paid

Function: adjective

1 : marked by the receipt of pay

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Where can I find their search engine?

How many search engines do they govern?

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

You just contradicted yourself.

__________________
Custom WordPress Themes, CubeCart templates, ModX templates, Movable Type templates. ~ B1tchslappin Political Blog ~ GreenSpeak Community Action

When dealing with matters of causality, it is important to make the distinction between the qualities of necessity and that of sufficiency. A causative agent may be either necessary, sufficient, or both.

In the case of payment for review of submission, with no guarantee of acceptance, payment is necessary and sufficient for the submission being reviewed. However, since acceptance is conditional upon the submission passing muster, the review alone is not sufficient.

Therefore, since the review alone is not sufficient, the payment alone, being a pre-condition to review, cannot itself be sufficient. And, if payment is not sufficient, acceptance is not "marked by the reception of pay."

Absent evidence to the contrary, why should one assume that any given usage of any word means something different from the plain and ordinary one?

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Not at all; it is the review that is "marked by the acceptance of pay," not the inclusion of the listing.

See If you pay for rapid review/submission is it a paid link directory?

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Except that the source you cited as the "authority" for the definition of "paid" is not recognized as authortative by the search engines for their purposes. Since the question being posed was in the "search engine forum" and relates to the view of the search engines, and since they do not adhere or accept the source you cited as being "authoratative" for their puposes or the question being posed in this thread, not only are you wrong, you are, as bj pointed out, contradicting yourself.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

As noted at If you pay for rapid review/submission is it a paid link directory? , there is here no contradiction.

And, as per the post to which you respond, absent evidence to the contrary, why should we assume any meaning other than the plain and ordinary one?

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Do your homework.

If you don't know that, as you put it, "evidence to the contrary" exists, that would be your failing, not mine. Not up to me to point it out to you nor show you were to find it.

But since I'm a nice guy, here's a quote from MC...

I trust you're able to find out where yourself.

Here's what the authoratative source you cited as it pertains to search engines have to say about "apple"...

Sorry, but the SE's don't agree with your "authority" source when it comes to their purposes. There's no reason to "assume" the "plain and ordinary" meaning applies.

You are welcome to "assume" what you wish for it is you making the baseless assumptions that do not apply, not I.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

But, MC's cited comment does not define "paid" in a manner that contradicts the ordinary definition.

BTW, if one purports to have facts to rebut the claim of another, that party must introduce those facts into evidence, else the claim is inadmissible. There is no presumption that such facts exist if they've not been expressly introduced.

When dealing with any word, the ordinary definition is always assumed in the absence of such being contraindicated. Were that not the case, there would be no commonality of meaning, and effective communication would be impossible. Therefore, it is not I who make an ungrounded assumption.

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Ummm..., the part of my post you "conveniently" chose not to quote does just that.

Your cited "authority" provides definitions not automatically and consistantly accepted by the SE's for their purposes. This alone makes any definition your cited "authority" provides inadmissable as a factual basis or authority for the purposes of this discussion.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

Huh? Did I not address the cited MC quote? That it failed to be displayed owes the manner in which this board handles quoted materials, not due to my having excised it.


This assumes facts not in evidence. As noted, MC's cited quote does not contradict the ordinary meaning of "paid." I earlier searched for any mention by Google or MC that would indicate that links in directories which provided for paid expedited review were considered to be "paid links" of the sort frowned upon by Google, and have yet to find any thing to support that contention.

If you've found something that definitively says otherwise, I'm open to reviewing it.

I make no claims re. "authority." Rather, I note that, by convention born of necessity, the ordinary meaning of words are assumed to hold when not contraindicated.

Otherwise, there can be no effective communications.

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Don't play dumb. Since you've "conveniently" chose to ignore it again...

This alone discredits your "authoritative" source when it comes to any definition your cited "authority" provides as a factual basis for the purposes of this discussion.

Yes you did. Here it is...

The source you quoted as authoritative has been discredited for purposes of this discussion.

Which of couse means you introdced the following statement...

...with no basis of fact. Mere speculation with the only "authoritative" source cited by you as the basis, discredited.

If you cannot read or remember what has been already posted, including what you post, then there cannot be communication at all.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

Audi, I hope this thread is helping resolve your confusion...

__________________
Clarrie
www.dvisions.co.uk - lose the camouflage and stand out...

It would appear that Audi is learning more about Webster's definitions than anything else.

__________________
.
Printer ink & toner cartridges in Canada | Integrated Web Payroll, Online HRMS Tools with Employee Time & Attendance

Thank you all for your kind submissions. I believe that the replies to my question are thought provoking, semantics aside. I had concluded before my question that if there was a free option for submission that the directory was probably not considered as a paid one, so far I think that this may still be correct.
However, I am using “Best of the Web” to gain traffic and promote the site at present. In this directory you pay for a Non Refundable Review of your site that does Not Guarantee inclusion. It does not to my knowledge have the NoFollow attribute. So I consider this a regular directory that is human edited, respected by Alexa and Google and a good prospect for bringing traffic to the site and as a by product is probably enhancing “my” site’s credibility.
On the other hand the DirectoryDump, directory openly saying that it is a paid link directory seems to be similar to BOTW offers visitor stats, Human edited and no guarantee of inclusion seems to have had its PR (power) taken away by Google.
I hope this may illustrate why I am confused.

1) Definitions of "apple" are here irrelevant.

2) The presumption that all words carry their plain and ordinary meaning, absent evidence to the contrary, is an undeniable necessary basis of all communications.

3) Presentation of the definition of "paid" is not an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, but merely the formal introduction of the ordinary meaning of the word under discussion.

4) No evidence has here been introduced to support the claim that Google employs the word "paid" in a manner that is not consistent with the ordinary meaning of the word.

5) Therefore, any claims that Google deems links from directories for which a fee is required for a review of the submission, with no guarantee of that submission being accepted for inclusion, remain unsubstantiated.

As earlier noted, I remain open to anyone providing any statement(s) from Google, Matt Cutts, or any other legitimate spokesperson for Google, indicating support for said claim.

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

A Google search for "directorydump" yields approx. 60,300 hits; many of these contain identical or nearly identical language. Hmmm.

Whether or not Google deems it to be a directory that is or is not trustworthy and/or authoritative cannot be deduced merely by looking the Google Toolbar PR, such being notoriously unreliable. It should be noted that the "directorydump" domain was 1st registered less than 2 years ago, and is, therefore, still quite new.

So, it may be the case that links from this directory may at present be deemed legitimate by Google, but of little to no PR value.

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

No it is not. Just one of the many examples where the "plain and ordinary" is not accepted by SE's for their purposes. Just because they do not come out and directly "say so" doesn't change the undeniable fact that they do.

Presume all you want. Assume all you want. SE's don't work that way. Tell it to them. Not one of them have come out said we use the "plain and ordinary" definitition for the word "paid" for their purposes. But they have given plenty of indications, Google in particular, how they define it as it applies to context of this discussion and is what the OP was asking directly.

Plenty has. If you've not seen it or found it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Cling to your assumptions. It's already been noted that "paid", for the purposes of this discussion and in the context of what the OP was asking directly, has been further defined as "Flow PageRank" and "Game Rankings". Furthermore, in the case of a "paid review", and again in the context of this discussion and what the OP is asking directly, not all "paid reviews" are OK for those purposes. In context, some are treated as "paid" and others are not.

This makes no sense whatsoever. Deems them what?

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

Audi... Paying for an express review or any kind of review, in itself, is not enough for Google to prevent that link from having "value". There are several things you can do to help you determine whether or not they are going to treat links from a particular page or site as "paid" and not associate any value to it. Is the page indexed? Does the page rank for anything? Do the sites/links being listed there appear to be organized and do they appear to be of higher quality?

The other thing I suggest, is not to "purchase" any type of link or advertising solely on the basis of trying to "promote" a site in the eyes of a SE. Always keep in mind whether or not they can drive good targeted traffic themself. This also goes back to whether or not the page/site ranks for anything. A page/site that ranks well for something that highly relevant to your site, stands a good chance of "promoting" your site regarless of how a SE treats it.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

Well, just for sake of argument, let us accept your definitions, and observe the results:

1) Directory listings which are gained where a fee was charged for the review of the submission, even though acceptance was condtional on the submission meeting certain editorial standards, is a "paid listing" as defined by Google.

What, for example, does Google do with regards to Yahoo Directory? Do they have some secret method of determining which listings there did and did not involve an expedited submission for which payment was made, and discount only those listings? In the absence of being able to make such a determination, do they arbitrarily discount any and all listings there? Or, do they arbitrarily count all? And, if Google views Yahoo Directory as a "paid" one, why does it show a Toolbar PR of 7?

2) "Paid" means that there is a nexus, of even the most tenuous and tortuous kind, to payment.

Can you convince all those who earned a degree, certification, or any other type of accreditation, that, because they paid for tuition, etal. that they did not earn those degrees, etc., but actually bought them?

Can you convince those who obtained professional medical care for the delivery of a child that they bought that child?

Ad infinitum

3) There is never any presumption as to the meaning of any word that anyone ever writes or speaks.

Firstly, let us note that you persist in claiming that I make assumptions. To the contrary, I have consistently use the word presumption. There is a difference; look it up. Oops, that's right, you don't accept the definitions found in dictionaries.

In any case, since there are no presumptions, and we cannot therefore presume to know what you mean by any word that you've here said, you'll need to begin by first providing us with your definitions. But, wait, since we don't know your definitions, how will we know what the words contained within your definitions mean?

4) The definition of "apples" is relevant to this discussion.

Once you've gotten past the hurdle of item 3), no doubt this will become clear to all.

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Is this not precisely what I've been saying all along?

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

This has gotten ridiculous.

You yourself posted what a "paid" listing is. Said it is "really quite straightforward."

It is not at all "straightforward".

• Links in the Yahoo directory (paid review) are not treated as "paid".
• Links in other directories (paid review) can and are treated as "paid".
• Some paid reviews are treated as "paid" others are not.
• Some "free" directories are treated as "paid" others are not.
• Some "reciprocal" directories are treated as "paid" others are not.

When it comes to SE's they do NOT automatically adopt the "plain and ordinary" for their purposes when it comes to "paid".

Here's what's really ridiculous...

Then...
From the thesaurus...

You can look up the meaning of "synonyms" if you wish.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

You've conveniently omitted the crux of the issue with respect to definitions, that of the universality of presumed meanings, failing to respond to that portion of my post which reads "In any case, since there are no presumptions, and we cannot therefore presume to know what you mean by any word that you've here said, you'll need to begin by first providing us with your definitions. But, wait, since we don't know your definitions, how will we know what the words contained within your definitions mean?" Not that I was expecting that to be directly addressed, but rather that I hoped that you would at least privately acknowledge that such convention does of necessity exist. Otherwise we end up in the Clintonesque situation of debating what "is" is.

Despite your protestations that Google employs the word "paid" in some arcane and obscure fashion, a claim not supported by any of Matt Cutt's posts or other Google provided material, you arrive at precisely the same conclusion re. directory submission reviews for a charge without guarantee of acceptance, at If you pay for rapid review/submission is it a paid link directory? , that I originally set forth many posts ago.

In short, you have validated my original position.

Perhaps you too narrowly confined the definition of "pay" or "payment" to mean an explicit exchange of money, when in fact a "payment" is "consideration," the form of which is not so limited. For example, in a pure barter transaction, no monies are exchanged, but rather goods and/or services serve as consideration. Reciprocal links, for example, are in fact just such a payment-in-kind arrangement.

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

Whether he did or not, you never did. I asked you to cite your source for this information. You never did.

__________________
Custom WordPress Themes, CubeCart templates, ModX templates, Movable Type templates. ~ B1tchslappin Political Blog ~ GreenSpeak Community Action

LOL!

Make up your mind deepsand.

In one breath you say...

In your next breath you say...

You take another breath and say...

Do you actually read what you post? Or what anyone else posts for that matter? You're like a whirling dervish spinning out of control taking things in and out of context. Saying one thing one minute and completely contracticting yourself the next.

No there is not. Confucius say... When in hole, stop digging.

The OP couldn't care less about how I define "paid". That's not what they're asking. They are asking how an SE defines "paid" for the purposes of promoting a site.

YOU were are the one who definitively made two totally contradictory statements as to what SE's consider to be "paid" links for THEIR PURPOSES and have yet to provide a single shred of anything to back either statement.

This has gone beyond ridiculous.

Dave

__________________
Religious-Jewelry Blog - Deep Link Directory - Religious Jewelry

My apologies for the tardy response; this is a thread that I'd lost track of.

See Matt Cutts blog, at How to report paid links .

In particular, note this portion.

"Q: Hey, as long as we’re talking about directories, can you talk about the role of directories, some of whom charge for a reviewer to evaluate them?

A: I’ll try to give a few rules of thumb to think about when looking at a directory. When considering submitting to a directory, I’d ask questions like:
- Does the directory reject urls? If every url passes a review, the directory gets closer to just a list of links or a free-for-all link site.
- What is the quality of urls in the directory? Suppose a site rejects 25% of submissions, but the urls that are accepted/listed are still quite low-quality or spammy. That doesn’t speak well to the quality of the directory.
- If there is a fee, what’s the purpose of the fee? For a high-quality directory, the fee is primarily for the time/effort for someone to do a genuine evaluation of a url or site.
Those are a few factors I’d consider. If you put on your user hat and ask “Does this seem like a high-quality directory to me?” you can usually get a pretty good sense as well, or ask a few friends for their take on a particular directory."

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com

My apologies for the tardy response; this is a thread that I'd lost track of.

While the difference between the two is subtle, the distinction is quite real. The problem lies in the fact that, owing to common usage, that distinction has been blurred.

A presumption is a premise that has a prior basis in fact, from which one can deduce a probability of its being true.

An assumption is a premise for which such prior basis in fact is lacking.

I.e., the former implies pre-existing information, whereas the latter is speculative.

As example, I can presume that you almost certainly typed your post to which I am now replying, owing to the fact that alternative data entry methods, such as voice recognition, are only sparsely employed, and very few dictate such posts to another for their being typed.

On the other hand, for me to claim that you had used a particular platform, i.e. OS, browser, make/model of hardware, etc., would be an assumption, as I've no factual basis for such assertion.

Language is highly malleable, with meanings easily altered by the vernacular, or vulgar usage. That I here make the fine distinction between these two words owes to the fact that my education trained me to be aware of such distinctions and thus chose the word most appropriate to the specific meaning intended to be conveyed.

Now, if I could only figure out & remember the difference between plethora & surfeit!

__________________
The Penn State Ticket Man http://www.pennstateticketman.com
http://www.happyvalleytickets.com http://www.hounddogtours.com