Re: Multiple Lists in a Search Engine

Eric R. Ward /NetPOST & NetWIRE/ (netpost_at_netpost.com)
Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:15:17 -0400 (EDT)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Archive Home Page
• Search
• Next message: Cliff Kurtzman: "Re: advertising a web site offline (was A money-making web site"
• Previous message: xerxes: "Re: visits vs. hits (fwd)"
• Maybe in reply to: Blitz-Design: "Multiple Lists in a Search Engine"
• Next in thread: Deborah E. Andersen: "Re: Multiple Lists in a Search Engine"

Hello,

I have never posted here, but as the original creator
in 1994 of the industry that is now known as Web site
awareness building, I wanted to address a couple key
points about search engines.

First, please be aware that being listed on hundreds of
search engines is worthless. Be listed on the search engines
people use for resource discovery. Period.

I do sessions all over the country, and have yet to find one
person who uses more than 15 or so resources to find sites
of interest. Use yourself as an example. When's the last
time you went outside the boundries to find something
(boundries being the big 15 or 20 search engines and directories).

So, don't be seduced by any service at any price that brags
about submitting you to 732 search engines and directories.
712 of them are a waste of time and money, unless you do it
yourself.

--

Search engines do ocassionally have a "drop".  The primary
reason for it is that it was unable to verify anything
at the url during its canvassing.  This could be due to a server
error at your ISP.  Even so, mysteriously the engines still do
seem to lose a listing now and then.  It is worth noting that
several sites thought they had been dropped when in fact they
were simply way farther down in the returned list of hits.
And keyword stacking is not the answer.  At least 4 engines
now monitor this and will kick you out if your stacking.

----

My experience with clients in many countries and
watching the search engines and directories now for a couple
years reveals that the search engines are becoming useless.
Get yourself in the biggies, then look for resources and engines
specific to your location or topic.  They will be far more
effective than being in 30 or 40 extra general interest
directories that nobody uses and which have names like
"Bob's Search-be-qwik" or "The whooper"

That said, I must agree that if you are doing it yourself, and
have the time and inclination, then go ahead and submit
wherever you can.  Why not?  I just have a grievence with
companies who claim to be in my industry, and then
try to sell services on numbers of submission sites they
offer.  There are perhaps 2,000 directories and search
engines of one type or another around the world.  For any
given site, I bet less than 40 of that 2,000 matter.

The next and far more crucial step is connecting with the right
community of users, reviewers, journalists, publishers, news
agents, filterers, and others who make their living by writing
about and featuring web sites and web news.  This is where
the future of your site lies.

Thanks for letting me rant, and back to my cave.

 Regards,

 -eric

Eric Ward - The WardGroup |NetPOST & NetWIRE| <netpost_at_netpost.com>

W W W   P u b l i c i t y ,  P r e s s  &   M e d i a   S e r v i c e s

o Technical Ed. MacMillan Publishing's "Strategic Internet Marketing"
 o Winner, 1995 Tenagra Award for Internet Marketing Excellence
  o Charter Member, I.D.A - Internet Developers Association
   o Guest Speaker - Adobe Internet Conference Series
    o Panel Speaker, Web Advertising 96 - October '96, New York
     o Guest, America Online's "Internet InBiz Show"
       --------------------------------------------------------------



On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Murray Fallen wrote:

> > From Bruno Block:
> >Initially I had used Postmaster service which costs $ 500 to do it once.
> >However it took 2 months before Webcrawler had included our site (was it
> >because of the Postmaster service? I doubt it) and just 2 weeks later our
> >listing had disapeard again.
>
> We have a different solution for the clients we do marketing for. We too
> place them on hundreds of search engines, but knowing that they may be
> dropped from some, we do a monthly search for our clients on the larger
> search engines to ensure they are still listed. If they have been dropped,
> we re-register them again. And we do it for less than any other service we
> are aware of - my pitch :-)
>
> We find some search engines drop you regularly, while others sporatically,
> and others seldom or never. It's a lot of work to just keep your site
> listed, let alone near the top.
>
> Murray
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> FREE Links now available on award-winning Top Shopping Site.
> Visit ABC to XYZ Mall at http://www.islandnet.com/~cvcprod/abcmall.html
> Reciprocal links required. Great stores and MUCH more are just a click away!
>
>
>

• Archive Home Page
• Search
• Next message: Cliff Kurtzman: "Re: advertising a web site offline (was A money-making web site"
• Previous message: xerxes: "Re: visits vs. hits (fwd)"
• Maybe in reply to: Blitz-Design: "Multiple Lists in a Search Engine"
• Next in thread: Deborah E. Andersen: "Re: Multiple Lists in a Search Engine"

With an archive of more than 14,000 postings, since 1996 the Online Advertising Discussion List has been the Internet's leading forum focused on professional discussion of online advertising and online media buying and selling strategies, results, studies, tools, and media coverage. If you wish to join the discussion list, please use this link to sign up on the home page of the Online Advertising Discussion List.