SEO folks vs Domain Folks

Sahar sent this article from Search Engine Land tonight.

Reading this piece I was struck by its tenor and how polarly opposite domain folks and SEO guys/gals seem to think. Domainers think: "How can I exist without Google .. if Google blew away tomorrow, how could I guarantee traffic delivery?" ..  SEO folks seem to think,  "How can I get free visits from the top search engine and if that top search engine ever changes, how can I get free traffic from the next top search engine."

Could domainers use their great domain names to "game" Google's algo and display their URL's and sub-domains more prominently?..  Yes.  Is that why most domainers buy or bought domains?  No.  It's about 'going around' the search engine, not through.

I feel for Google because it's tough at the top. They sit on all this traffic. Everybody wants it because traffic is like money. If they give it out 'here', it has ramifications for their algo ..  if they give it out 'there' it has different ramifications for their algo.  Their success in delivering relevant results drives even more traffic (revenue) to their front door..  like a crazy house party that everyone wants to attend.

Google has to keep targeting, hunting, finding the most useful results and stay ahead of the increasing flood of black, gray and white-hats to keep this magic parade going. Yes, they get a redo if they make a boo-boo or two, but if they consistently mess up, or if the gray-hats manage to buy (arbitrage) or game (SEO) their way to the top in a big enough way as to render their results less-useful, GOOG opens the search-pie up to competition, because the results are less pure. The house party thins out as folks look for the next big thing.

So I see Google as a traffic bank..  a central reserve of traffic, that has to keep giving most of it away or holding it back from monetization in order to grow the overall pie and bring more and more visits to the front door. A web traffic de Beers.

Domainers are the polar opposite of this dynamic.. They want their organic front door traffic and that traffic is free with each name's registration. Domainers can show what they like at each domain.  The traffic comes organically. It comes irrespective of implementation and can be leveraged via arbitrage without consequence (in the sense that domainers can buy traffic at Google or Yahoo or MSN to enhance their organic traffic volume). Google doesn't want to index them?  That sucks, but organic type-in traffic still comes around the search engine through the address bar and other navigation.

The coup d'etat of search and navigation may occur the day that Felix can explain his intentions to Oscar and vice-versa .. a world where this odd couple can find common ground to leverage each others strengths in a way that creates a much bigger pie of their own. The value of the prize is at least partly reflected in the market capitalization set using Google's closing price today.

Then again, maybe such a meeting of the minds won't happen.  Perhaps domain registrants continue to do their own thing,  probing, experimenting, building and trying to get bigger until the day that they find that way through and release the hammer. Man, you gotta love disruptive technologies :)

Comments

[Cygnus]

Frank,

I've noticed that a lot of SEOs have begun to recognize domaining's potential over the last couple of years and that many domainers are beginning to recognize the value generated from repeat business and branding that comes with multiple channel traffic. Though some fringes are indeed polarized, I see the industry overlapping a lot more in the near future; there's simply too much money at stake to ignore either side.

JoeSinkwitz (Cygnus)

***FS*** Well said Joe.. I definitely see it as a trend.

[rhart]

You mention Domainers trying to 'going around' the search engine, and SEO guys saying how can I get free traffic from the search engine. But also, "The coup d'etat of search and navigation may occur the day that Felix can explain his intentions to Oscar and vice-versa".

Well, I don't see them as so mutually exclusive. And I see it happening in many ways now. I think there are alot of DSEO's (Domainer Seo's) or SEOD's (SEO Domainers) if you will.

The guy that the bridged Oscar and Felix was their poker buddy Murray. So, because DSEO or SEOD does not seem to be catchy, I propose we call DSEO's or SEOD's just simply "Murray's". There are a lot of Murray's out there, and more coming.

http://www2.jsonline.com/letsgo/movies/wishollywood/images/almolinarobig.jpg

***FS*** HHA Ha!, Thanks for the link!!~

[Jamie]

I really like the fact that "mainstream' business still seem to be equal parts ignorant, baffled and disdainful of both SEO and domaining. It can't last forever, but at least the window still seems to be open for these fields to further develop internally before they get commoditized.

***FS*** Nice comment.

[stuntdubl]

The real sharp folks are playing somewhere in between. Domainers are learning they can partner with good SEO's project managers, and get the best of both worlds, and improve their monetization strategies.

There is a bit of head butting between the two, but together domainers and SEO's (if they can get by the overwhelming inherent laziness) make a pretty good team.

Nice perspective on the thought process from the respective points of view.

***FS*** Thanks .. you too.

[David Wrixon (aka Rubber Duck)]

One day Google will wake up to the fact that one of the biggest determinants of whether there is likely to be useful content is the domain extension. A lot of alternate extension are rarely used for much else other than Adsense sites.

It would seem inevitable that extension should be ranked according to content quality, which would make dot com a massive SEO driver.

***FS*** I think the engines may look past domains at some point when they start looking deeper at specific content and how its displayed. But ultimately .com 'still' plays into human behavior in the form of fulfilling aspiration to be a part of the 'domain-club' .. Then again we could both be wrong. Will be need to be a part of the eveolution .. regardless of the outcome.

[marcia lynn]

Franky, I'm glad to see dialogue between you and Aaron.

Direct Navigation and SEO are so fundamentally different that, traditionally, a person involved in one industry had no concept or understanding of the other.

One versed in SEO believes that if a site isn't at the top of organic search results, it doesn't receives qualified visitors.

One versed in Direct Navigation believes that placement at the top of organic search results is temporary and not within the site owner's control.

I experienced the deep rift between these two industries a few years ago when one of our websites dropped from page 1 results. I didn't notice it for at least 9 months, as we were too busy acquiring more names and developing sites.

We found out later that when that site fell in the results, a local webmaster literally *stated* on her website that our business was gone, that we were finished! I couldn't believe it when I read that -- thinking, how in world can someone think that ONE website's placement would shut down a business?

Then I realized... she had no concept of direct navigation or that traffic and income can be spread across thousands of sites, not one or two or ten. And they don't depend on traffic from an engine.

Hopefully, dialogues like the one between you and Aaron will continue and help bridge the chasm of misunderstanding.

:)
marcia lynn