How do we choose which sites we submit to?
An
important part of the work that we carry out for our clients
involves getting their software listed on "the important"
shareware and software sites. The problem is identifying the
sites that are worth submitting to.
Some
believe that there is no such thing as a site not worth
submitting to. Others believe that only a very small number of
the sites are worthwhile. The fact is, however, that while there
is no shortage of sites to submit to, the time required to do so
is another matter altogether.
The research.
In August
2003, we decided that due to the ever-increasing number of
shareware and software sites, we needed some way to ascertain
the value of each.
We then
decided on a fairly simple means of doing so.
We
combined the raw web logs from one single month of some fifteen
of our clients, and then wrote a basic application that would
search for the names of referral sites, then group and count
them accordingly. The software also searched for all the names
of known shareware and software sites. If there were no
referrals whatsoever, these were listed as zero.
The main
drawback of this technique was that a site generating a high
number of referral counts might not indicate any visitors at
all. Some sites display data (for example icons) that are pulled
from the developer's website, and this would then be counted as
a hit. Our method would not allow for differentiation between a
hit and a visitor.
Other
issues to take into account included the way that some sites
refer to other sites, the fact that some sites may use a
different referring domain name, the fact that some sites host
their own copies of the files, the sites that only list a small
number of specific applications and so on. The list of
exceptions proved to be extensive to put it mildly, but these
were then removed from the list altogether. This process was
carried out manually, as the last thing we wanted was to stop
working with sites that can and do generate a reasonable level
of traffic.
Once
complete, we still couldn't make any assumptions about the top
end of the list. The bottom end of the list, however was a
different story altogether.
The results.
We
discovered that some of the sites that our clients' products
were listed on were being counted with very low figures; for
example many were in the 1-5 range.
What did
this mean? For the sake of diplomacy, let's create a fictitious
site - www.superblycoolsoftware.com, which generated a total of
5 referrals. Let's also assume that this site listed a total of
twenty of our clients' applications.
This means
that when we combed the web logs from fifteen different clients,
www.superblycoolsoftware.com generated a total of 5 referrals;
which may have been displayed images or actual visitors. Even if
all 5 were actual referrals, resulting in 5 visitors, a total of
5 visitors to 15 different sites over a period of one month is a
little on the low side.
This now
presented us with some extremely useful information, and once
we'd excluded some of the sites with particular circumstances,
we could clearly draw the following conclusions:
(1) That a large number of the sites listing our
clients' software generated an incredibly low number of
referrals.
The obvious
counter-argument to this is that if a site generates even one
visitor per month to a client's website, then wouldn't this be
worthwhile?
The answer is
no, not at all. If one site generates one visitor per month, a
small fraction of these will explore the website to any level of
detail. Of these, a small fraction will download the software.
Of these, a small fraction will actually purchase the software.
When you look at a small fraction of a small fraction of a very
small number over a long period of time, you're looking at
possibly waiting for many years (or longer) to generate a single
sale, if at all!
(2) That blindly submitting to hundreds of shareware
sites is a waste of time.
Even if
sites are quick and easy to submit software too, time is still
required to do so. We have seen software that claims to submit
software to around 400 sites, but aside from anything else, this
still takes time. The time taken to submit to (possibly)
hundreds of sites that generate almost no visitors or downloads
is time wasted. Most companies can find better things to do with
their time than waste it.
At this
point we reached a difficult decision; what to do with this
information.
We
realised that although one end of the list was highly
questionable, the lower end of the list pointed to a fair number
of websites that simply do not generate traffic of any sort. It
wouldn't be too difficult to argue that submitting to these
sites is completely pointless.
However,
we realised that by releasing the details of this information to
the public, we would be pointing a very damning finger at a
fairly large number of websites. For reasons of conscience,
liability and peace of mind, we decided to keep this information
within our company.
We
ourselves can now choose where to submit our clients' software
with far greater precision, and as well as optimising the actual
submission process, this also allows us to more accurately
utilise one of our most important assets - time.
So how many sites are worthwhile?
Drawing a
line on how many sites are worth submitting to wasn't easy. The
results of our analysis suggested that submitting to the top 30
or so sites was critical, and if we wanted to maximise our
efforts, then the top 50 or so sites appeared to be worthwhile.
For our
long term clients, in the interests of being certain, we then
decided to add the next 40-50 sites as well.
Our
research suggested that beyond the top 100 sites or so, it
simply wasn't worthwhile.
Does the number of links on a page affect its ranking?
Introduction
Lots of research has focused on inbound links to a site, but little has focused
on the number of links actually on a page. Many SEO gurus have recently
been talking about something they call ‘ PR Leak’ which seems to
be a theory that the more outbound links you have, the more your page rank on Google
"leaks" away.
This concept isn`t found in the academic papers published by Google, but does
seem to be accepted by a majority of SEOs. I decided it was time to take
a look at the number of links present on a page and how that number correlates
with ranking.
Methodology
Online poll
What would make you abandon an order if you were shopping online?
- Having to register before buying
- Hidden charges at the checkout
- Lengthy checkout process
- No clear delivery details
- Phone number not provided on website
(Submit your answer and we`ll show you the results so far)
I gathered the results of the queries that were performed last month by myself
and three associates. I counted the number of outbound links on the page and tabulated
the results against the ranking of the URL in the search results. The
tabulated results were then converted into a normalized "ranking correlation".
The resulting graph show the results for groupings of links normalized into a
number between -100 and +100, showing the likelihood of being ranked higher/lower.
A value of +100 shows that all ten rankings were in the proper order to show that
pages of the studied value always rank higher than pages of another value.
A value of -100 shows that all 10 rankings were in the proper order to show that
pages of the studied value always rank lower than pages of another value. Numbers
in between show the varying likelihood of rankings proportionally between -100 and
+100.
Results & conclusion
As you can see from the graph below, the results are very conclusive. Google
ranks pages with outbound links much higher than pages without links. The SEOs
touting the ‘ PR Leak’ theory are simply wrong.
Limitations
- There was no attempt to isolate different keywords. I merely took a random
sampling of the queries performed by myself and three associates during the
month.
- This is merely a correlation study, so it can`t be determined whether the
leading search engines purposefully entertain this factor or not. The actual
factors used may be far distant from the factor we studied.
This article was written by Jon Ricerca. Jon is one of the leading researchers
and authors of the Search Engine Ranking Factor (SERF) reports at
SearchEngineGeek.com.
What next?
Read more search engine optimisation articles on this website
- Optimise your website with our usability consulting and accessibility
consulting services
- Get a new website through our user-centered design and accessible web
design expertise
- Attend one of our five interactive usability & accessibility training courses
Republish our search engine optimisation articles
All our search engine optimisation articles are available for republishing, provided
the author bio and links in the bio remain intact. You can also use our RSS
news feed to republish all of our search engine optimisation articles.
SEO articles index
|