{"id":136,"date":"2005-08-09T06:45:25","date_gmt":"2005-08-09T14:45:25","guid":{"rendered":"\/?p=136"},"modified":"2005-08-09T06:45:25","modified_gmt":"2005-08-09T14:45:25","slug":"register-early-add-many-years","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/2005\/08\/09\/register-early-add-many-years\/","title":{"rendered":"Register Early, add many years!"},"content":{"rendered":"

My business partner (Mike Stephenson) forwarded me this article. He says “You should urge our clients to buy domains as soon as they can and register them for as long in the future as they can afford to do so!”<\/p>\n

Here is why he says that (he emailed me this article):<\/p>\n

“As you may have heard, Google filed for a patent that takes
\nthe history of a domain name into consideration, as part of
\nthe ranking algorithm. There’s also a lot more history like
\ncache data and nameservers taken into consideration.<\/p>\n

If you’re up for a little “lite reading” you can read the
\nfull patent application here:<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.uspto.gov\/patft\/index.html<\/a><\/p>\n

(Just do a quick search of the “Published Applications” and search
\nfor 20050071741 to find Google’s recent Patent Application.)”<\/p>\n

“Two months after the sites went up, Google updated its
\nPR in the toolbar. The first site, the one with the brand new
\ndomain name, registered for a single year got sandboxed. In
\nother words, Google came and spidered the pages, but the PR
\nremains less than zero, greyed out and unranked.<\/p>\n

The second site also got spidered, but the results on this
\none were very different. A PR1 on the home page, a PR5 on
\nthe sitemap, and a PR4 on each of the seven internal pages.<\/p>\n

Remember, these sites are nearly identical in terms of
\ncontent. They are exactly the same in linking structure.<\/p>\n

The only major difference is the history of the domain name.
\nHow long ago it was registered. And how many years into the
\nfuture, it has it been reserved”<\/p>\n

Full article:<\/strong><\/p>\n

I took two domain names. One was just registered for a
\nperiod of a year. The other I had already owned for a year,
\nbut never did anything with it, and just renewed it for
\nthree more years.<\/p>\n

I set up a small site on each domain. They used the same
\nhosting company and shared the same IP address. The pages
\nwere simple text only pages, with nothing more than a few
\nparagraphs on each page. They consist of a home page, a
\nsitemap page, and seven internal pages.<\/p>\n

The home page has nofollow links to all the internal pages.
\nThe only static link is the one to the sitemap. The sitemap
\nhas static links to all the internal pages and a nofollow
\nlink back to the home page. All the links leaving the
\ninternal pages have nofollow links.<\/p>\n

The last thing to do, was to let search engines know about
\nthe new sites, by linking into them. I took two PR4 pages
\nand linked them to the home pages of the new sites in an
\nidentical manner. Within weeks, all major search engines
\ndiscovered and crawled both nine page sites.<\/p>\n

The experiment was designed to test two things. Would
\na new site be sandboxed by Google… or only if it was on a
\nnew domain name? Would two incoming links be sufficient
\nto start the PR concentration process as shown in the Mastering
\nPR video?<\/p>\n

Two months after the sites went up, Google updated its
\nPR in the toolbar. The first site, the one with the brand new
\ndomain name, registered for a single year got sandboxed. In
\nother words, Google came and spidered the pages, but the PR
\nremains less than zero, greyed out and unranked.<\/p>\n

The second site also got spidered, but the results on this
\none were very different. A PR1 on the home page, a PR5 on
\nthe sitemap, and a PR4 on each of the seven internal pages.<\/p>\n

Remember, these sites are nearly identical in terms of
\ncontent. They are exactly the same in linking structure.<\/p>\n

The only major difference is the history of the domain name.
\nHow long ago it was registered. And how many years into the
\nfuture, it has it been reserved<\/p>\n

As you may have heard, Google filed for a patent that takes
\nthe history of a domain name into consideration, as part of
\nthe ranking algorithm. There’s also a lot more history like
\ncache data and nameservers taken into consideration.<\/p>\n

If you’re up for a little “lite reading” you can read the
\nfull patent application here:<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.uspto.gov\/patft\/index.html<\/a><\/p>\n

(Just do a quick search of the “Published Applications” and search
\nfor 20050071741 to find Google’s recent Patent Application.)<\/p>\n

The experiment shows that the sandbox theory appears to be
\nreal. Seems it was a “patent” testing ground for taking the
\nhistory of the domain name and applying it as part of the
\nranking algo.<\/p>\n

And as many new webmasters have found, it can take three
\nmonths or more, before you get released from the purgatory
\nknown as the Google sandbox and start to appear in the
\nGoogle search engine listings.<\/p>\n

Ok, back to our test results. How did I get such a low PR1
\non the home page and manage a staggering PR5 on the sitemap?
\nWell, PR just means a page is important, not what it’s
\nimportant for.<\/p>\n

To determine what a page is important “for” depends on the
\nincoming links. And the best way to get a page known for
\nsomething, according to Dr. Andy Williams and Jason Potash’s
\nresearch, is to write an article and have it spread all over
\nthe internet. But that’s another story.<\/p>\n

PageRank – or why a page is important – goes way back to the
\nhubs and authorities ranking system of citation analysis,
\nthat is part of the very foundation of Google.<\/p>\n

In my test, the sitemap is considered a very important hub,
\nbecause it links to seven other pages. It is the only page
\non the internet that links to those pages. And the only way
\nto find this important sitemap is from the home page, thanks
\nto the way PR is concentrated within the site by using the
\nnofollow tag.<\/p>\n

Since the sitemap scored a PR5, at least PR4 gets passed
\nalong to each of the internal pages. So why the lowly PR1 on
\nthe home page? Well… that’s my fault.<\/p>\n

In my zest to get the experiment completed, I forgot to make
\nnormal static links back to the home page from each internal
\npage. I accidentally left all links on my internal pages as
\nnofollow links. What I should have done is completed a PR
\nfeedback loop with the seven PR4 internal pages, linking
\nback to the home page with static links.<\/p>\n

Even though I’ve made the changes, it will take another
\nthree months before the PR gets updated in the Google
\nToolbar. So we’ll have to wait and see.<\/p>\n

To conclude this little experiment, yes… a decent PR can
\nbe attained in 10 pages or less. Does it help you rank
\nbetter in the SERPs (search engine results pages) … yes.
\nBut it is only one piece of the ranking formula.<\/p>\n

You still need incoming links. The incoming links must build
\na reputation for what your page is about. The PR is added as
\na matter of page importance. And finally, as my research is
\nbeginning to show, the age and history of your domain name
\nwill be taken into consideration as well.<\/p>\n

So if you plan on creating a new site for yourself or
\nclients, you may consider building on a domain name that’s
\nbeen kicking around for a while. Then on top of that, go and
\nregister it for a least three more years, to show that you
\nare indeed serious about owning it and hanging on to it.<\/p>\n

The amount of time you spend in the sandbox, your PR and
\nposition in the SERPs may depend on it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/div>
<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

My business partner (Mike Stephenson) forwarded me this article. He says “You should urge our clients to buy domains as soon as they can and register them for as long in the future as they can afford to do so!” Here is why he says that (he emailed me this article): “As you may have […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3,5],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/136"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=136"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/136\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=136"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=136"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ubertor.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=136"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}