Sandbox and com vs .info

[freetraff]

Is there any difference about getting into sandbox and the domain name?

In particular - are .info domain names more likely (with all other factors included) to get into the sandbox - and .com domain names less likely?

I have a list of possible hypothetical explanations for PROs and CONs, but would like to hear what you had in your experience.

[activeco]

What sandbox?

[martty]

Google have not used the sandbox for years.

[freetraff]

How about this Google Sandbox Exists - So Says Google | Threadwatch.org

I know this is not the ultimate source of truth, but it is very likely that sandbox is more a reality than we used to think.

(by the way, Webnauts, I took this link from your post on this forum, that is why - sorry for plagiarism)

[Peter (IMC)]

Sand box still exists.. just got a different name now. Age algorithms. And they probably tweaked them a bit to make it less of an impact on sites once they are in the sandbox.

And no, domain name has absolutely nothing to do with your rankings.

[janeth]

.info domain names are more likely to have a problem then any other domain name.

And the sandbox still exist.

[wesleyw]

Bert and Earnie used to play this little game, it was a counting game..

I start out, then you go...

I ONE the sandbox...

(now its your turn, you do TWO...) - strange the things you remember...

anyway the punchline is "you ate the sandbox!"

guess its a little off topic, ill go back to doing whatever it was I was doing now...

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by freetraff

How about this Google Sandbox Exists - So Says Google | Threadwatch.org

I know this is not the ultimate source of truth, but it is very likely that sandbox is more a reality than we used to think.

(by the way, Webnauts, I took this link from your post on this forum, that is why - sorry for plagiarism)

Quoting a 3 year old post on website that doesnt even update anymore is not very authoritative.

[rjjj111]

I would trash the .info name and get a .com, even if you have to pay money for a good one.

You will be way ahead in the long run........

[craigmn3]

I have been doing a lot of niche keyword marketing where I am aliasing several dozen domain names to individual folders on a single hoster. The niche keywrods are so specialized that 2-3 days after I create the website they are on the top ten of google. No sandbox. Competing in these micro markets are easy. The top keywords markets are so impacted that you may just feel like you're in a sandox

[Laurentvw]

I don't know if it gets sandboxed or not, but .info pretty much sucks, I'd never get such a domain. To me, .info is like a spam domain (.info domains have bad reputations, that's a fact), so get a .com, .org or .net.

[Webnauts]

Looks like Google do not really like .info domains. More about:

Poor .info Domain Name Strategy, Afilias : SEO Book.com

and here

Google Temporarily Purges .info Domain Names : SEO Book.com

[activeco]

There was never-ever the thing called "sandbox".
The religion was born after Google hit DMOZ and many enthusiastic editors found their newborn domains/pages with thousands nice links not ranking anymore immediately after the birth.
Hundreds if not thousands threads and comments were posted and none ever proved it.

[Crawdad]

Originally Posted by craigmn3

I have been doing a lot of niche keyword marketing where I am aliasing several dozen domain names to individual folders on a single hoster. The niche keywrods are so specialized that 2-3 days after I create the website they are on the top ten of google. No sandbox. Competing in these micro markets are easy. The top keywords markets are so impacted that you may just feel like you're in a sandox

I agree. I've seen this happen with our sites as well.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by freetraff

How about this Google Sandbox Exists - So Says Google | Threadwatch.org

I know this is not the ultimate source of truth, but it is very likely that sandbox is more a reality than we used to think.

(by the way, Webnauts, I took this link from your post on this forum, that is why - sorry for plagiarism)

The Google sandbox used to be in effect a number of years ago but not today. The sandbox was evidenced by having the words "supplemental index" alongside your listing in Google. The "supplemental index" tag has not been around for a long time.

[Peter (IMC)]

Sandbox was related to age.

Now you hear webmasters sometimes complain they dropped completely out of Google and then a while later they´re back. That's caused by the same algorithms. They have been adjusted obviously as it is now not so likely anymore for a new site having to wait 12 months before ranking anywhere.

[Terry Van Horne]

I agree that what was called the sandbox was an age/ trust thing as in Google doesn't trust newly found links immediately.

I can't take seriously the notion that .info TLD is automatically a problem or that .gov, .edu or any TLD is weighted heavier or penalized just nfor being .info. Most of that is greenhorns who have to think they know why things rank. IMO, that's all just not provable. I do believe .info may look like that because that was a favorite TLD of MFA's and other dodgy purveyors of spammy tactics. I was looking at the .PRO TLD. I can't wait until all the domainers are touting these as advantageous to professionals. It's inevitable, domainers will say anthing to flog second tier TLDs at higher prices!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

I can't take seriously the notion that .info TLD is automatically a problem or that .gov, .edu or any TLD is weighted heavier or penalized just nfor being .info. Most of that is greenhorns who have to think they know why things rank.

.info domain names were dropped from Google at one time.

Google Temporarily Purges .info Domain Names : SEO Book.com

And here

» What Matt Cutts Said at Domain RoundTable 2008 - John Andrews - johnon.com

From Matt Cutts

Generic domains that users are likely to remember, will indeed carry more weight than others. There is a real value to those FuneralHomes.com for example. Google does give keywords in the URL a certain amount of weight, but you don’t need it in order to rank.

Makes me think that one extension may carry more weight than another.

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by janeth

.info domain names were dropped from Google at one time.

Google Temporarily Purges .info Domain Names : SEO Book.com

And here

» What Matt Cutts Said at Domain RoundTable 2008 - John Andrews - johnon.com

From Matt Cutts

Generic domains that users are likely to remember, will indeed carry more weight than others. There is a real value to those FuneralHomes.com for example. Google does give keywords in the URL a certain amount of weight, but you don’t need it in order to rank.

Makes me think that one extension may carry more weight than another.

Sorry to disagree with you again Janet,..

What Matt means in that quote is not related to the algorithms. Of course he doesn't say either way,. But when people remember a domain name easily then yes, that carries more wait,.. for your business,... not for the ranking algorithms.

Here's another quote from that second article:

Q; on tld’s and their impact on ranking. Matt says early literature shows G didn’t care about what TLD was using.. just # links and how reputable those links were. He says except fro some corner cases, it doesn’t matter, and he says most people will never fit those corner cases.

Shows again that TLD's don't matter. You can use .info. What determines it's authority is the popularity, nothing more than that. How you promote your business is your choice. Google just records it and uses it to rank your site. (or not)

[Serious]

Agreed. As soon as it is a gTLD, it doesn't matter which one (for Google). ccTLD is a another story, of course.
OTOH, which gTLD you use matters a lot for your visitors (and so for potential links).

[pchauhan]

I don't think so there is such an issue that .info domain are much in much in Sandbox than .com domains

and what about this


Google ??????????? Is this used for checking the sites in sandbox ???

[activeco]

Originally Posted by pchauhan

and what about this
Google ??????????? Is this used for checking the sites in sandbox ???

Sandboxes are usually testing environments, so this one is not an exception.
It's used for testing e-commerce gadgets.

We'd like to inform you of an upcoming change to the Google Checkout sandbox, the system that allows you to test your Checkout integration.
On January 17, we're changing the Google Checkout sandbox URL to sandbox.google.com/checkout .

[SEO]

Originally Posted by activeco

Sandboxes are usually testing environments, so this one is not an exception.
It's used for testing e-commerce gadgets.

I agree with activeco... Sandboxes are generally testing grounds, not only with Google but also with sites like Wikipedia:Sandbox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Orkut Developer Home - Google Code, https://developer.paypal.com/, and many others.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Sorry to disagree with you again Janet,..

What Matt means in that quote is not related to the algorithms. Of course he doesn't say either way,. But when people remember a domain name easily then yes, that carries more wait,.. for your business,... not for the ranking algorithms.

Here's another quote from that second article:


Shows again that TLD's don't matter. You can use .info. What determines it's authority is the popularity, nothing more than that. How you promote your business is your choice. Google just records it and uses it to rank your site. (or not)

The fact that all .info names were dropped at one time would lead me to believe Google has a way of targeting them and was doing something with them at one time.

[Terry Van Horne]

Originally Posted by janeth

.info domain names were dropped from Google at one time.

Google Temporarily Purges .info Domain Names : SEO Book.com.

Hmmm, I want to isolate and filter a bunch of MFA sites, Yeah I know I'll run my program over all .info... woops... there go .info for a day. Finished my program... I add a scrubbed .info back into the main index. Shit happens man... and SEOs are jumping to conclusions and .info has a .99 Sense value to the spammers of the world.

Originally Posted by janeth

.» What Matt Cutts Said at Domain RoundTable 2008 - John Andrews - johnon.com

From Matt Cutts

Generic domains that users are likely to remember, will indeed carry more weight than others. There is a real value to those FuneralHomes.com for example.

Google is not mentioned specifically.

Originally Posted by janeth

Google does give keywords in the URL a certain amount of weight, but you don’t need it in order to rank. Makes me think that one extension may carry more weight than another.

Note the second time he mentioned Google specifically.
1. Easier to remember isn't even relevant to SEO
2.There's a difference between a url and a domain

I bolded the most important part of Matt Cutts' quote because that is a big factor in this discussion. Matt could mean keywords anywhere in a url including file and folder names carry extra weight. IMO, domains are touted as more important because people make money selling them. This has been a puzzle to SEOs for longer than it has been called SEO... Personally I've never seen anything so compelling that I don't use other criteria in choosing domain names. I am not saying I know for sure but... this debate has gone on forever in the community.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

Hmmm, I want to isolate and filter a bunch of MFA sites, Yeah I know I'll run my program over all .info... woops... there go .info for a day. Finished my program... I add a scrubbed .info back into the main index. Shit happens man... and SEOs are jumping to conclusions and .info has a .99 Sense value to the spammers of the world.

And you are also jumping to conclusions. Did you talk with Matt and he told you that is what happened or are you jumping to conclusions?

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

1. Easier to remember isn't even relevant to SEO

Generic domains that users are likely to remember, will indeed carry more weight than others.

Did you notice the carry more weight. That is relevant to SEO.

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

2.There's a difference between a url and a domain

Generic domains that users are likely to remember, will indeed carry more weight than others.

I agree and he said domain names.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

Google is not mentioned specifically.

You are correct, I'm pretty sure that Matt Cutts was talk about MSN and not Google.

I mean, how stupid was I to assume that Google's head engineer was talking about Google and not Yahoo, MSN or ask.

[Terry Van Horne]

Janeth, jump to conclusions, perhaps that was a bad choice of words, my apologies if it offended. I have run tests ie done "live" research three times beginning in 98ish and ending in 2003 and looked at this many times. This topic has been discussed ad nauseum and basically there is no way to prove this.

IMO, Matt was referring to users when he talked about "generic domain names" and Google when he talked about "urls" and ranking. So basically he said google does give weight to any part of a url (url does include fiolder and file names) and generic names are best for users because they are easier to remember and more likely to be entered directly into the browser.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

Janeth, jump to conclusions, perhaps that was a bad choice of words, my apologies if it offended. I have run tests ie done "live" research three times beginning in 98ish and ending in 2003 and looked at this many times. This topic has been discussed ad nauseum and basically there is no way to prove this.

IMO, Matt was referring to users when he talked about "generic domain names" and Google when he talked about "urls" and ranking. So basically he said google does give weight to any part of a url (url does include fiolder and file names) and generic names are best for users because they are easier to remember and more likely to be entered directly into the browser.

First we need to understand that Afilias submitted a proposal to ICANN for the .INFO TLD that allows them to shut down any domain name at will if they consider them abusive. ICANN approved it. So owning and marketing a .info domain name that someone can come in and shut down anytime they want is not a good thing.

Second

In Matt Cutts 2008 predilections he said

A top-level domain (TLD registry) will offer domains for under $4. The result will be another TLD blighted by spammy domain registrations.

Maybe you are correct; maybe it was just an accident. Just seems funny that it was only the .info domain names with the problem. But add in the fact that they can be shut down at any moment and that Matt Cutts predicated lowering the price of domain names would cause a spammy domain and all of them disappearing for a time, just does not seem like an extension I want to play around with.

And it makes sense to me that Google could very well be filtering that extension more than others. Without testing it no one knows for sure and anything we post here would be nothing more than our own thoughts and ideas. Since I have no time for testing, I’ll just stay away from .info extensions.

Just my two cents

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by janeth

The fact that all .info names were dropped at one time would lead me to believe Google has a way of targeting them and was doing something with them at one time.

Yes, but they were dropped for less than a day. And after that everything was back to normal. They just did some tests probably.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Sorry to disagree with you again Janet,..

I like it, don't worry.

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Yes, but they were dropped for less than a day. And after that everything was back to normal. They just did some tests probably.

Or maybe they had to dial down the algo because it was to aggressive. (: