Age hurdle

[Steven1976a]

I believe that old domains which are constantly updated with either new products or new information have an advantage over new domains in terms of high ranking. Are we agreed? I think it is a good way of filtering through serious websites/companies so that every tom, dick and harry who has a good idea doesnt make a website today and its straight to the top of the list tomorrow. I think anyone serious about doing an online biz should be in it for the long run.

Now, being on the other side of the fence, we started a new website about 12 months ago and its struggling! I believe this is an age factor.

So my question is, if you believe also that the age factor is a big ranking factor, then how long does a domain have to be in operation before it gets over this hurdle?

[morestar]

I believe that old domains which are constantly updated with either new products or new information have an advantage over new domains in terms of high ranking. Are we agreed? I think it is a good way of filtering through serious websites/companies so that every tom, dick and harry who has a good idea doesnt make a website today and its straight to the top of the list tomorrow. I think anyone serious about doing an online biz should be in it for the long run.

Now, being on the other side of the fence, we started a new website about 12 months ago and its struggling! I believe this is an age factor.

So my question is, if you believe also that the age factor is a big ranking factor, then how long does a domain have to be in operation before it gets over this hurdle?

well I've heard both sides of the story with this. Some say age matters some say it doesn't.

Maybe where age comes into play is in such factors that age has contributed to such as the amount of links towards the site that have been built up.

If you were to ask me for a definitive answer I would say age matters only a slight and should never be considered the reason your SEO efforts aren't producing the results you're hoping for. There are a myriad other reasons this is so...

P.S. I love Fergie...and Kanye West is a Jack-ass.

[ncseo]

it's not just the 'age factor' of domain creation

it's also the age factor of when site was first indexed....and i believe the biggest part to SEO is the age of links which I don't see how can be manipulated

If you do buy a domain..make sure it was indexed about the same time..and make sure it has links that were pointing to it years ago.


to answer your question.....there are many factors

exact match domains rank rather easily even if they are brand new

new domains with authoritative backlinks can outrank an old domain

New domains with proper SEO (title tags) can outrank an old domain that doesnt have proper SEO

[claybutler]

I've seen from experience that age in itself is not really an issue. It's all the other stuff that comes with an aged site that you just take for grated. Like the tons of inbound links you get overtime just from bots and scrapers adding you to directories.

For any new domain I've seen that even one good keyword rich link from a high PR (3+) page can have a huge impact. Throw in three or four of these types of links and, depending on the keyword competitiveness of your your business, you can do very well in the SERP's right out of the gate. Perhaps even dominate if it's a niche market or your competitors are doing a piss poor job with their own websites.

[chrisJumbo]

I would agree that with Age more links usually come with it. And certainly more authorative ones. Don't let age be an excuse. Just keep up the link building.

I've seen some very new sites dominate even competitive niches because they were able to get some good authorative links.

[Weedy Lady]

I've designed 3 web sites for 3 local non profit organizations and in both cases the sites were on page one of Google results about 10 days after they went on line.

Not for every possible keyword..............but for what I think are pertinent key words. High ranking for other key words hopefully will come over time.

And when it came to choosing key words I picked the ones I thought were important because I'm a local citizen and know what I would type in to look for the type of organization. I also asked the staff of each organization to try to think like a client (not like the staff person he or she is) and send me a list of all the key words they could think of. Between my list and their lists it worked out pretty well.

The actual point of this ramble is that NO there is no sandbox for brand new sites per se. Not when one little old lady can get results like the above.

[deepsand]

Per Goggle's patent(s) age is a factor; but, how heavily weighted such is is a well guarded secret.

A similar, but different, factor mentioned in said patent(s) that is of greater import is how long the current Registration period.

Taken together, the longer a site has existed, and the longer its current registration period, the more confident one can be that the owner/operator is in for the long haul, and the more favorably it will be viewed by Google.

[Steven1976a]

thanks for the replies. There seems some merit in believing that the links that an old site has developed is the reason why an old site ranks better than a new site. I thought that old links the search engines ignored them and actually it was new fresh links they were always looking for?

[Doc]

One would hope (although perhaps in vain) that while longevity would be taken into consideration for a site's staying power, that the algos also take into consideration, with sufficient weight, the updating of the site, over a protracted period. Certainly, Google has said that these all enter into their equations, but who can say what carries a higher weighting?

At the same time, it obviously wouldn't be "fair", for a brand new site to be relegated to the "also ran" category, regardless of it's importance.

I cannot even begin to imagine the complexity of the Google algos! Without any expectations of perfection, it still boggles the imagination.

[deepsand]

thanks for the replies. There seems some merit in believing that the links that an old site has developed is the reason why an old site ranks better than a new site. I thought that old links the search engines ignored them and actually it was new fresh links they were always looking for?

"Staying power" is a factor in determining "authority," as is the total number and stability of IBLs. A site that's been around for a while, has accumulated a large no. of stable & long lasting IBLs, is the more likely to be deemed an authoritative site, which will serve to increase its SERP rank.

On the other hand, a site of any age isn't going to benefit as greatly as it otherwise might from new IBLs if there's a lot of churn. E.g., assuming all IBLs involved pass the same PR, a site that has & keeps 4 IBLS and gains 2 will be better off than one that has 4, loses 1 & gains 3.