__/ [ Paul B ] on Monday 15 May 2006 01:41 \__
> On 14 May 2006 16:41:03 -0700, bestwebmarketing@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>For some time now i check that some old domains have hi pr altough the
>>websites dont seem no have nothing much more than that.
>>Is domain age important for PR?
> sadly, yes.
One thing I /do/ know is that Google filed a patent (later authorised, I
suspect) for domain lookups, which determine the maturity (positive
connotation for "age") of domains. Whether this is used in practice, I am
not sure anybody knows. Such a strategy would discriminate against new
businesses, which lies in some adversity to the history (recent emergence)
of Google, a garage startup company. This also does not fit right with the
following item, which I read just a few hours ago:
Now, let's also separate the issue of existence and runtime from that of
domain registration. Some domains were registered early, later to be
dropped (therefore becoming "deleted domains"). Should this give them any
priority? Probably not. Sites and parked domains tend to go on Netcraft's
radar quite early on, whereas Google will require indexing through inbound
links. In due time, it builds trust. New sites are likely to contain spam
or "get rich quickly" schemes. The proportion of the Web that falls into
the latter category is immense, yet fortunately we get to see just a tiny
fraction of it.
I could go on with my drivel, but I'll stop...
Hope it helps,
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:00am up 17 days 12:57, 11 users, load average: 0.59, 0.97, 0.84
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine