May 06
Yahoo! Is Now Ranking TKG.com
I stand corrected…
In my post earlier today, I mentioned that www.tkg.com was not ranking yet - after additional research by our awesome SEO interns, we found that for some of the phrases I mentioned in my Search Engine rankings benchmark post, both the new & old domains are ranking in Yahoo! This gives us more ‘real estate’ in the SERPs (see image below) which is great for us now - but I know this will all end once everything shakes out. Hopefully we can gain additional traffic from Yahoo! while both domains are ranking..I’ve checked and so far, Yahoo! isn’t supplying any more traffic than it used to.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Here is my question: Why wouldn’t you keep http://www.thekarchergroup.com as your main domain, and 301 redirect all requests from http://www.tkg.com through to http://www.thekarchergroup.com. You could use http://www.tkg.com in all marketing materials, and even links (though not suggested for obvious reasons). This way you wouldn’t have to re-build your index from anything, but still have the freedom to use tkg.com (according to your reasons in your news article).
I just don’t see the reason behind completely switching the domain? Am I missing something?
May 7th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Hi Nate,
The reason we decided to completely switch was because we realize the inherent advantage in the 3 letter domain over the longer version. The cleanest and most “legit” approach, though it is more work, is to actually replace the domain. The short term losses and pain, we believe will be far outweighed by having the new domain become our primary domain and properly used.
For instance, let’s pretend we run a marketing campaign in 6 months promoting our new CMS, and we are using print, PPC, PR and SEO. There are factors in each of these that would give real advantage to using tkg.com as our primary domain:
Print: an ad containing the URL tkg.com/cms would not require any redirects or special setup on the server
PPC: ads need to land on the actual domain listed in the ad
SEO: We’ll want users in the search space to see the same URL in all mediums
PR: Any embedded links in a release should be consistent with the advertised URL, while adding value from a link pop standpoint should they get picked up
Of course, there are many other factors, but hopefully these examples give some insight as to why we felt the time and energy are being well spent.
Thanks again Nate,
Jen
May 7th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Jen,
I would definitely agree that a 3 letter domain is a nice aspect.
Print: You could use tkg.com in print wherever you want, it will have no direct relationship to your SEO efforts (unless Google decides to crawl snail mail somehow…he). All the user needs to know is what to type into their address bar. From the initial news release regarding the switch, it seemed as though this was a main reason: people misspelling your domain. They can type in tkg.com - and instantly (and transparently) get pushed to thekarchergroup.com. It wouldn’t require any more redirects than what you are using now to redirect to tkg.com.
PPC: Again, this is an instance where you know the domain. You aren’t going to misspell your own domain in a PPC campaign. Again, a user isn’t going to copy/paste this - they are going to click on it. They don’t care if it is tkg.com or thekarchergroup.com - all they care about is getting to the correct site/page. So all of your campaigns could have the full URL, there is no inherent benefit over tkg.com in this instance.
SEO: This is understood - but again, as long as you have one domain pointing to a central location, this won’t really matter. From an SEO perspective, the age of your previous domain weighs in pretty heavily. I wouldn’t want to give that up. Not to mention you have years of inbound links pointing to thekarchergroup.com. You have 113 inbound links (including links from your own domain and branded client sites). These links aren’t going to change (unless you have somehow gotten all webmasters on external sites to update their links to point to tkg.com). These will still show up in the search space, too.
PR: Just as with print (and as with your domain, years of having your domain already printed on ads, letterhead, cards, etc), the domain here won’t really matter to the end user. If you wanted, change all of your PR links to tkg.com, and have that push transparently to the other domain.
I would say that, more than just the process of being re-indexed and starting from scratch, it would be interesting to see reports of the bottom line: Did this move ultimately help people find you easier and drive more traffic to your website? This kind of reporting obviously takes time to compare the analytics, but I would think that would be the bottom line.
Thanks for the response Jen, I’m just trying to understand what major factor has driven you guys to completely change your domain.
Later,
Nate
May 7th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Print…a good print campaign will have specific URLs, beyond just the .com. for instance, tkg.com/cms
Same goes for PR…we may use direct, specific URLs. We don’t just use our root domain.
PPC… tkg.com would take up less real estate in the PPC display URL field allowing the opportunity for it to be optimized, give a better perception etc. It’s against the rules to display tkg.com, and send traffic to thekarchergroup.com, so we’d be forced to use thekarchergroup.com
Many of the inbound links we believe we can influence, and over the course of the next several weeks have similar or greater domain equity than we had before.
Thanks for your comments,
Jen
May 7th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Print: I fully agree, but mapping your domain is a simple task. This doesn’t simply apply to the root domain. You can redirect tkg.com/cms to thekarchergroup.com/cms (or whatever else path you want). It all happens transparently to the user anyway.
PR: Again, I am not saying redirect only the root URL. Do the same redirect you do now, which maps everything, only keeping the inverse so you can keep the original domain, the age of the domain, and the inbound links.
PPC: I am not sure I follow the logic here. Real estate for the PPC display? Again, in this situation it doesn’t matter anyway - all they have to do is click on the link. You manage these campaigns, so you are obviously going to spell the URL properly. Even if they copy/paste - they get the right link. I am obviously not suggesting trying to mask a domain, I just don’t see how this will help PPC campaigns besides being a shorter URL in the URL field, which has no real benefits.
I know you will be able to influence some of those links, as they are your client sites, business listings, or absolute links from within your own domain.
I guess I am just curious as to why you are even going to the trouble of switching a domain without any real needs or benefits.
Thanks for the responses/feedback.
May 8th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Hi Nate,
Try and step back for a moment, and leave the details out of it. I know you’re a fan of clarity right? The best way to maintain clarity to our users, customers, prospects etc. is to focus on and promote 1 domain, not 2.
Jen has outlined the basics of several technical reasons for doing this, which we could easily elaborate on. However for the sake of getting to the point, just think in terms of the challenge and expense of promoting 1 domain, let alone 2.
I assume we agree that every marketing effort, whether online or offline, should contain your URL. As far as I’m concerned, there is no good reason to promote 2 different URLs that lead to the exact same content on an ongoing basis.
I am extremely confident, even with the difficulty the previous domain owner has handed us having used the domain for spam, that in a relatively short amount of time the new domain will surpass the online reputation of the old.
I hope this helps.
Geoff
May 8th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Geoff,
To clarify, here are just a few examples of what I am referring to. The following domains that are in marketing materials (print, radio, television, etc). When the users puts in those domains, they are transparently redirected to the domains that follow them.
nikebasketball.com -> nike.com/nikebasketball
cavs.com -> nba.com/cavaliers
sonytv.com -> sonypictures.com/tv/
microsoftoffice.com -> office.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx
itunes.com -> apple.com/itunes/overview/
This is just a small sample of sites that do this, and there are many other domains for each of the above companies that they use for marketing and PR reasons that redirect to their main domain.
With all due respect to Jen, there have been no technical reasons listed for making such a move. There have been reasons based on preferences of three letters, which, I agree is better - but there is no technical reason that the domain had to be completely switched. The same methods you are using to redirect the old domain to tkg.com could be used to do the inverse. All of your print materials (ads, letterhead, etc) could list http://www.tkg.com. Any ads you run on other websites (where you have control) could be sent to either domain - you control the link - but you always have one point of entry. Your PPC campaigns would just point to thekarchergroup.com as you have to use that domain in that situation. An end user wouldn’t care one way or another in this situation (again, even if they copy/pasted they would still get it right).
This really has nothing to do with promoting 2 domains, at all. You aren’t promoting two domains, you are just maintaining one point of entry. You guys have full control to redirect accordingly, and that happens transparently to the user. In the instances where you are worried about spelling (offline marketing), you simply give tkg.com and you are set.
So, in the end - it’s your business decision to switch, I am just questioning the logic behind the need to switch domains. I would also be interested in how moving to this domain will help you surpass the ‘online reputation’ of the old domain.
May 8th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Nate,
Regarding all of the examples you sent, after a quick review, I hope you would agree that most of them are great examples of what not to do in several ways.
Secondly, there are many factors at work on those domains, in some instances allowing them to rely purely on fortune 500 level brand recognition (Apple), and in some instances, forcing them to redirect things in a very unfortunate way (Cavs).
Our situation is quite different from both.
Regarding the technical issues; without getting too deep into this, I’ll try to illustrate just one issue. I’m not sure how familiar you are with the concept of Link Popularity, but in general, it has to do with the quality and to some degree, quantity of links pointing back to your site/domain.
Any marketing efforts, especially those online,but including off-line as well should contribute to that. So, if we were marketing tkg.com in all marketing efforts, yet redirecting it to thekarchergroup.com, we would to a large degree be foregoing all Link Popularity that may result from those efforts because there is no guarantee that Link Popularity is passed over a 301. It’s ideal to have links point to the actual domain.
Believe me, we understand how easy it is to re-direct domains. However, easier isn’t always the right way.
Why not take the hit now, and do it right? I see no reason to both duplicate efforts, and confuse users with 2 domains going forward.
Geoff
May 8th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Geoff,
In what ways are they examples of what not to do? How is the Cavs situation unfortunate for them? Them being fortune 500 companies has very little to do with the fact that they market with one domain that redirects to another domain/subdomain/subdirectory. Each of those examples either use a 302 or 301 redirect, depending on their long term uses of the domain. The PageRank and indexes of these sites are not affected negatively.
I guess I fail to see how your situation is different: You want to have brand recognition with a shorter domain name, but have a previous domain.
I am very familiar with link popularity, which is why I am confused as to why you would switch domains completely. I don’t see a link to offline marketing being affected by your domain name. Use tkg.com offline, that’s fine. How does your offline marketing contribute to link popularity? That has no value to your link popularity process anyway as it would be a direct hit (unless google starts indexing offline marketing?).
Ill say this again: Your main reason listed for switching was people misspelling your domain in offline marketing or word of mouth, and wanting to shorten your domain name in offline marketing and PR. Using tkg.com can help relieve that, but that has no affect on your online marketing. All of your online marketing can go to thekarchergroup.com without any problems. You control your PPC campaigns. You control the links from your client sites. You control the links between your subdomains. You control the advertising links on the web. What difference does it make to someone when they click on a link if it was to thekarchergroup.com or tkg.com? None - they are simply clicking on a link and landing at a destination. The domain name has no significant role here. You are online, you aren’t telling people your domain and then having them go type it in - you are putting the address in a link, it requires no work on the end user. The burden is not theirs to somehow screw up your rankings.
This has nothing to do with 301 redirects and link popularity. The only place you would need to 301 redirect would be with direct hits to the website, or the occasional link here or there (if any). As self proclaimed ‘SEO Experts’ I am sure you understand the importance that the age of domain plays into your overall rankings. You spent the last ten years using a domain and building trust with search engines, then switched it for a domain that had previous spam/blacklisting problems, and now you have to re-build the age aspect. Obviously, the only way to do that is keep the same domain for an extended period of time. That just doesn’t seem to make sense for any of your marketing efforts (but that is my opinion).
The age is especially important for your domain as a large amount of your inbound links were from your own domain/subdomains (with absolute URLs, via google.com/search?q=link:thekarchergroup.com). So, now you take the hit twice by switching domains, and losing inbound links as they are no longer being able to weigh in on your incoming links and the ‘trust’ they previously had with the search engines.
In all of these responses I have yet to see answers for:
1. How will this affect the bottom line: bringing more traffic to your site. There was no business change, just a domain change. How will that suddenly drive traffic by itself?
2. How are you confusing users? Again, YOU control the one point of entry. This is all transparent to the end user. It seems like you are putting the burden on your end user, when you control all of the internals.
3. What are the technical constraints and reasonings for switching domains?
4. How will this surpass the ‘online reputation’ of the previous domain?
I am curious from both the marketing and the technical aspects.
May 9th, 2008 at 9:35 am
Hi Nate:
Cavs.com, redirected with a 302 (temporary). This is likely why you see both nba.com/cavs and cavs.com ranking for the same phrases.
Nikebasketball.com is redirected to an all flash site, the likely reason that these pages don’t rank even when you search specifically for the product: nike zoom soldier II. Nike is outranked by several other sites and forced to buy PPC for their own product name. The page that does rank (in the number 10 spot) is not even this product, it’s an older version in their online store.
Sonytv.com is not redirecting at all, it should be a 301.
microsoftoffice.com is using a 302, should be a 301.
itunes.com, is using a 302 as well.
Link Popularity: If I send a press release out today, and it has tkg.com in it and gets picked up by a trade publication, it would be wasted effort from a link pop standpoint, if we set it up as you are suggesting. I don’t know how much more clear I can make that.
Age of the domain is a factor, however neither of these domains are brand new. They are both quite old.
We believe the link popularity and “trust” is very likely to be carried from the old domain to the new, even from Google’s standpoint. It won’t happen overnight, and the unfortunate oversight of the RBL will delay it. However, I believe that once we have that cleaned up, the equity of the old domain will be applied to the new.
Offline Marketing can certainly contribute to link popularity. Consider for a moment, an article that just ran about TKG in a popular Cleveland print publication. It was an “advertorial” in other words a paid ad. It did contain our URL. The article, in it’s entirety was placed on their online property. The article happened to be about SEO. So, in that instance, an offline marketing buy generated some very highly relevant links to our site. The online visibility was not part of our spend, or ad. It was a side benefit. This can happen in lots of ways. Do you really think it would make sense, in an instance like this, to be promoting 2 domains?
To attempt to directly answer your questions:
1. We don’t expect this to miraculously drive more sudden traffic. We are in business for the long haul. So, over the course of the next 10 or 20 years, we believe the marketing potential, and impact on offline marketing of a 3 letter domain will have a very positive result.
2. A proper redirect is not transparent to the user. The URL does change when they land on the site. I see no reason to promote thekarchergroup.com online and tkg.com offline. I am a proponent of 1 URL for 1 set of content. I think you’ll find that any white hat SEO expert would agree with that; “self proclaimed” or not.
3. The technical constraints, if I understand your question, are proper and consistent marketing and SEO. Technically, we have the capability to do whatever we want and re-direct, etc. if we wanted to. However, for us it’s all about doing it right. By making tkg.com our primary domain, we now are able to add content to our site at will to complement all online and offline marketing efforts. We won’t have to create special redirects for ad campaigns etc. going forward. Everything can be done through our CMS, as it should be. It’s the cleanest and most professional approach in our opinion.
4. It will surpass the online reputation of the previous domain by first, inheriting the reputation thekarchergroup.com has now. Secondly, but a natural consistent marketing and link building effort. Third, by being easier to use, easier to remember and harder to mistype.
I’m asking you to step back for a second and just think about this. Try not to think about all that you know is technically possible when you’re sitting in front of a linux command prompt. I’m sure you’re very savvy in that way and we certainly realize that lots of things can be done easily.
Think about it from a pure marketing standpoint. Should we take your suggestion, we would be promoting tkg.com in print materials and building recognition of that as our URL, while online we would still be promoting thekarchergroup.com. This makes no sense at all, as there will clearly be overlap between to 2 on a very regular basis. Consider what happens when you have a campaign that blends direct mail, TV, radio, email, PPC and SEO. Consistency is key. It’s hard enough to get human beings to remember/recognize 1 message.
May 9th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Geoff,
As I stated in the previous comment, those domains were either 301 or 302 redirected. For some of them using 302, they may have different plans or uses the for other domain - or - they already have a brand established and aren’t concerned with it. Regardless, regular users don’t care about the domain they end up on - they care about getting to the content they search for or typed directly into the browser. With the apple example, they have a PageRank of 9 and years of trust, they can get away with 302 redirecting itunes.com or ipod.com, etc. The point still stands - they are able to use a domain name like itunes.com, have a user type it directly, and end up on their desired destination page. Do you really think a user sits there and thinks? Wait? I typed in itunes.com and got apple.com/itunes instead? They have reached their destination - this is what I mean it is transparent to the user. A regular user is not going to keep re-typing the first domain because they have been redirected. So, aside from stating the obvious (that the URL is redirected), it is transparent to the user. They are trying to reach the content.
Domain age is definitely a factor. You can pull over link popularity, but the age of your domain will still be counting down from the date you purchased the domain, the the total age of the domain (as it is changed with ownership). So, while you may be able to get re-indexed, you can’t just gain the age factor.
Again, you have control over your links in offline marketing, we have already established this. You are PAYING for the advertorial, you should be able to specify ho you want things presented in the different mediums. You are NOT promoting 2 different domains in the sense of telling potential users 2 domains. You are telling your potential users 1 domain, and your online marketing (powered by you) where you want them to point (which is a hyperlink, a click for the user, not domain name recognition). This, and the fact that PR and link pop are technically supposed to transfer through a 301 redirect (what you will be building back up).
1. See, this is what I see as your main reason. You have been attempting to give technical reasons that don’t add up. You switched domains because you like the 3 letters versus 15. There are no technical constraints placed, it is a decision you made.
2. As stated above - it is transparent to the user. As long as they land at their destination, they don’t care one way or another. I have been saying this in each and every comment: YOU have full power to manage the one point of entry, I am in no way arguing that point. You are attempting to give technical constraints that don’t exist as your reasoning (which is number 1 above).
3. ‘we now are able to add content to our site at will to complement all online and offline marketing’ - How could you not achieve this re-directing the other way? There are no ’special’ redirects needed, its 2 lines in a configuration file. You want people to type tkg.com/advertisement and you can do that, the server takes care of the rest. There are absolutely no special redirects needed (no more than what you are already doing to point to tkg.com). What special redirects are you referring to?
4. I am sure it will eventually get updated in the index to where thekarchergroup.com was, but I still fail to see a direct correlation between that and your link building and consistent marketing. This comes back to number 1 - you want a domain thats easier for people to type and less letters: there are no technical constraints.
I am not asking you to take my suggestion, I just feel you are passing on information that simply isn’t true in an attempt to build more links.
From a pure marketing standpoint, It still doesn’t add up. I used to work for Barbour Publishing, and we had our url in radio advertisements, fliers, local events, books, and other marketing PR. We chose a shorter domain for those things, which all point to http://www.barbourbooks.com. There was always one point of entry, and we were able to easily and consistently track these results via our analytics. What matters is that people can get to the content they are trying to reach. The domain name has no added magic to suddenly help you have more traffic. The PageRank was consistent and passed through any 301 redirects we had in place for our offline marketing. I’ll say it again, you aren’t asking people to remember thekarchergroup.com and tkg.com - all they need to know is tkg.com.
All I am saying is call it what it is. It isn’t a ‘case study’, it isn’t a ‘crazy’ move (in the sense that you didn’t have to make that move) - you made the move to have 3 letters versus 15. I just don’t get why you are trying to make it out to be something bigger. You chose to dig the hole.
May 9th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
OK…now I think I am understanding what this is all really about. You’re frustrated that we’ll get links out of it. We hope to, no doubt. We also do believe that those who do have to change domains for whatever reason, will learn something from this experience.
We were up front about the fact that we chose to switch. Clearly, we didn’t have to. There are no false pretenses here as you are accusing us of. Yes, we like the 3 letters better and yes, we want to gain links, guilty as charged.
I still contend that our approach is the right way to do it. Advertising 1 domain online and a different offline simply makes no sense for many reasons both technical and nontechnical.
There are some great resources you could read to understand proper uses of redirects better, (Check out SEOmoz.com) so I don’t think spending time on that is well spent for either of us, or any readers of this blog.