Domain tld change Yes or No?

[marknc]

I recently posted regarding the collateral damage we experienced by the recent Google update and have drawn a lot of conlusions based on the enormous help and support I have received from many of you for which I am extremely grateful. I have my work cut out for me but with all the sound advice I'm sure the journey back - though it may be slow - is assured.

One suggestion has been haunting me of late. We are a UK based operation (online jewellery shop - madaboutjewellerydotcom). It was suggested that we change from .com to .co.uk., and it kind of makes sense. Can anyone give me any insight into how Google might view this change and is there any danger of further relegation under the newly revised algorythm? Currently, the .co.uk is forwarding to the .com but it would be easy enough to reverse it. Any views would be appreciated.
Mark

[bermuda]

If you are already happy with your current web ranks and traffic shares gained through its position on Google, and at the same time all your efforts in web maintenance including publishing contents on your site and also building links so far have been done based on your .com address, why would you change the trends suddenly and commence optimizing your new co.uk home that might need some extra efforts and optimization?

Although it might seem quite logical to assume that by focusing on your co.uk domain, if everything is done professionally, your UK ranks might get better, but you can still have a .com portal with decent ranks in Google.co.uk also. Trust is gained in the course of time, and naturally some unprecedented things could possibly happen if you shift to the co.uk status. (Do not forget to gather some authority links from co.uk domains)

[marknc]

Not happy with my web rank never changing/improving. Haven't really given much attention to backlinks over the years and seem to have picked up some dodgy hitch-hikers (very low-life backlinks) along the way, we are weak in this area and have commenced a link-building strategy but it's early days and a slow and tedious task that detracts from the business of running a high fashion jewellery shop.

We have been punished by Google's algorythm change, we have completely disappeared from SERPS for our main keyword and I mean completely. We have managed to drag ourselves up from the ashes of rage and indignation and thank God for Yahoo and Bing and others who still put us on page 1 for this vital keyword. But the great successful search engine that we have relied upon for 12 years, and provides 80 percent of our traffic, has shat upon us from a great height, regardless of our fabulous website, conscientious customer service, and reliability.

We fully intend to recover of course and will, but I'm thinking that using the .com tld may not be so appropriate when we are looking for more UK traffic. The new UK home, as you call it, I presume would pick up the traffic from the 301 redirect on the .com. The site is already optimised though there is much room for improvement anyway.

[Noble123]

If you already come under the dark shadows of the Google panda/penguin update then its time to move to the new domain and use the 301 redirection techniques. Also FYI you can try setting the Geo-location in Google webmasters account in case you want the UK based traffic only.

[deepsand]

If you already come under the dark shadows of the Google panda/penguin update then its time to move to the new domain and use the 301 redirection techniques. Also FYI you can try setting the Geo-location in Google webmasters account in case you want the UK based traffic only.

Nonsense.

Simply changing the TLD and redirecting the old TLD to the new is not going to change the indexing engine's evaluation of the contents.

It's still the same old stuff with a new name.

[deepsand]

once blacklisted with Google, dont bother trying.

you can try but that is wrong so that google also penalty of you site so that i think don't take this type of risk

If the OP's site were penalized beyond repair, it would not be visible in the SERPs; i.e., it would have been banned.