Directort Listings (Alphabetical, PR, Hits etc.)

[london]

Hi

I may be completely wrong about this but something just drives me mad.

It relates to the question of how directories list their sites. There are many ways that I have seen which include alphabetical, by number of hits, by PR and by first come first served.

I do not see the benefit at all of submitting to a directory or link partner page that lists the sites alphabetically. I find it infuruiating coming back to a site to find that I have switched pages because some one else has anchor text that is further up the alphabet. I find the same with the other ways of listing. PR is another one but slightly fairer. By number of hits is not fair at all as the top ones will get seen more and therefore get all the hits.

I find the only fair way is first come first served basis thereby the people who have come to the directory when it has a low PR, maybe none, and have waited the longest get the benefits.

I might be way w -- This message may have been cut off and the rest will only be shown to members. To become a member, click here --

[froggish]

First come first serve may not be all that beneficial for the end user of the directory. Alphabetical order is a bit more logical.

If you plan on using directories as an important part of your marketing strategy, choosing a name that starts with "A" isn't a bad idea.

Also, you can always pay for a featured listing to ensure that you remain on the first page. -- This message may have been cut off and the rest will only be shown to members. To become a member, click here --

[sheridan]

Originally Posted by froggish

First come first serve may not be all that beneficial for the end user of the directory. Alphabetical order is a bit more logical.

If you plan on using directories as an important part of your marketing strategy, choosing a name that starts with "A" isn't a bad idea.

Also, you can always pay for a featured listing to ensure that you remain on the first page.

The only point is that it was not as fair as first come first served.

I am about to delve into the directory world myself so could you please expalin why it isn't beneficial to the end us -- This message may have been cut off and the rest will only be shown to members. To become a member, click here --

[vikasrocks]

Originally Posted by london

I may be completely wrong about this but something just drives me mad.

It relates to the question of how directories list their sites. There are many ways that I have seen which include alphabetical, by number of hits, by PR and by first come first served.

I do not see the benefit at all of submitting to a directory or link partner page that lists the sites alphabetically. I find it infuruiating coming back to a site to find that I have switched pages because some one else has anchor text that is further up the alphabet. I find the same with the other ways of listing. PR is another one but slightly fairer. -- This message may have been cut off and the rest will only be shown to members. To become a member, click here --

vikasrocks

View Public Profile

Send a private message to vikasrocks

Find all posts by vikasrocks

[31146dgreat]

Originally Posted by london

I find the only fair way is first come first served basis thereby the people who have come to the directory when it has a low PR, maybe none, and have waited the longest get the benefits.

I have to agree that listing sites by pr abc and # of hits is bull. Directories that list this way imo are not seo friendly at all. The reason I say that is because lets say that you were on a page that gave you a backlink in google once your site is moved to another page you will lose that backlink. So for me that is the major drawback to listing that way.

I have my sites listed in a few of t -- This message may have been cut off and the rest will only be shown to members. To become a member, click here --

[warne]

I sort alphabetically, purely because I think it might help someone who is checking the directory to see if their own site is listed.
PR is Google's measure of the importance of a page, and it's obviously flawed and entirely irrelevant to directory listings.
I do agree that there's some unfairness in the way sites are sorted. But this is only an issue if you have an unwieldy number of listings per category anyhow. More than 20 and it's time for a new subcategory anyhow. It might mean moving some sites further down the directory tree, but at least that way the listings are more specific to a certain topic, so a user is more likely to find what they are looking for.
-- This message may have been cut off and the rest will only be shown to members. To become a member, click here --