How important is the age of a website?

[WEBLAUNCHPHXX]

I don't think that domain age is an important factor for seo. Any site can easily rank in search engines on the basis of thier optimization cause ranking is not depend on a singal factor.

[JJMcClure]

Ok, what about this then.

Google became a domain name registrar but don't actually sell domain names, they may have done it to get access to all the other domain name registrars APIs.

Isn't it possible that they did it partly or wholely because they wanted info on domain name ages so that it could be a factor in their algo?

[hooperman]

Possibly, but who apart from Google can say how they use that information?

As far as a page being the best fit for a searcher's query, age has no bearing. As far as determining whether a page is spam, maybe if that page is on a 10 year old domain then it is less likely to be spam. I would guess that if age us used, it is more likely to be used in conjunction with other multiple factors like:

If (age < x) and (very little content) and (dubious linking history) then don't trust

I just made those factors up for illustration purposes, I'm not saying they are involved in any measure of "trust".

I don't think you can say for certain that "pages on old domains rank better".

[Ajibxx]

Age is not important..But old site with large content more better than new site with large content.. Think it..

[stymiee]

Age of site does matter. if you continue to follow Google guild lines, PR of that site will continue to increase.

PR has nothing to do with the age of a site. PR has to do with the link popularity of a page.

Google became a domain name registrar but don't actually sell domain names, they may have done it to get access to all the other domain name registrars APIs.

Isn't it possible that they did it partly or wholely because they wanted info on domain name ages so that it could be a factor in their algo?

They registered as a registrar so they can see who owns a domain name and see when domains expire. That way they can remove PR, etc, from expired domains, etc. It basically helps them reduce spam and crap.

[JJMcClure]

So, a website that's 10 years old with all other things being equal, has no advantage over a site that is new?

Google don't factor into it's quality score some kind of reward to the older site for being much less likely to be spam because of it's longevity?

Is that something completely different from domain age?

[stymiee]

So, a website that's 10 years old with all other things being equal, has no advantage over a site that is new?

Google don't factor into it's quality score some kind of reward to the older site for being much less likely to be spam because of it's longevity?

Is that something completely different from domain age?

The benefit of being an older site is that you have had more time to get backlinks then a newer site which most likely means a higher ranking for your pages. But that's a result of the links, not the age of the site or the domain. The age of a site or domain has nothing to do with the quality or relevance of a page or site which is what search engines are trying to determine.

[shakir]

Age is one of the main factor, SE will consider the age of the site

[JJMcClure]

The benefit of being an older site is that you have had more time to get backlinks then a newer site which most likely means a higher ranking for your pages. But that's a result of the links, not the age of the site or the domain. The age of a site or domain has nothing to do with the quality or relevance of a page or site which is what search engines are trying to determine.

Ok I see what you're saying. It has to be some other factor not just the longevity because ultimately being around for a long time increases all those other factors, but on it's own it means nothing.

[JJMcClure]

Age is one of the main factor, SE will consider the age of the site

Can you explain why you think that?

[stymiee]

Age is one of the main factor, SE will consider the age of the site

Did you even bother to read this thread?

Ok I see what you're saying. It has to be some other factor not just the longevity because ultimately being around for a long time increases all those other factors, but on it's own it means nothing.

Exactly.

[webvicious]

Age of domain is definitely important as longas the domain has been up online since it was purchased. It is but 1 factor in the algorythm which determines rankings. New sites can definitely rise up the rankings if you link to the site initially from some well ranking sites and update it everyday with unique content and articles it will rank well.

[JJMcClure]

Age of domain is definitely important as long as the domain has been up online since it was purchased.

How so?

[stymiee]

Yes, please tell us how so....

[junjun]

Age of domain is definitely important as longas the domain has been up online since it was purchased. It is but 1 factor in the algorythm which determines rankings.

Can anyone point to any tests (a-b or whatever) done that will support claims like these? This thread seems to be full of just posted opinions, many of which we know not to be true (PR being a product of age for example)

[USPB]

older pages has higher page rank

[stymiee]

older pages has higher page rank

Please read the whole thread before posting nonsense like this. You didn't even read the post above yours. It doesn't add any credibility to your posts and makes you look silly.

[internetdominus]

Age is definetely a ranking factor.

The older your site is, the more SE think/assume your site is not a spam site built to make easy money from affiliates or PPC...

SE also might assume your site is a real business, as it has been for so long online...

SE might also assume that old sites are visited more often, and therefore get more worth backlinks through time.

Old sites might also be crawled more often as old could mean bigger in content, and SE want new content as often as possible.

Older pages not necessarily have a high PR, and still rank better that sites with higher PR simply...I have seen this happen for many different keywords I use with my competition...

[lee_vhoi_ol]

It's all reasonable what people are saying here, but can we see supporting documentation on this? If such a thing exists.

I have read that Google prevents new sites (6 months or less) from immediately getting very high rankings. But after that, I'm not so sure if age has any effect at all. If it does, I think it's only minimal.

[JJMcClure]

It's all reasonable what people are saying here, but can we see supporting documentation on this? If such a thing exists.

I have read that Google prevents new sites (6 months or less) from immediately getting very high rankings. But after that, I'm not so sure if age has any effect at all. If it does, I think it's only minimal.

Hah, good luck with the doumentation...

The effect that you're talking about is the Google sandbox but it only applies to ranking and not to indexing.

[stymiee]

Age is definetely a ranking factor.

The older your site is, the more SE think/assume your site is not a spam site built to make easy money from affiliates or PPC...

SE also might assume your site is a real business, as it has been for so long online...

SE might also assume that old sites are visited more often, and therefore get more worth backlinks through time.

Old sites might also be crawled more often as old could mean bigger in content, and SE want new content as often as possible.

Older pages not necessarily have a high PR, and still rank better that sites with higher PR simply...I have seen this happen for many different keywords I use with my competition...

Do you have any other evidence to back this up other then "I have seen this"? This seems like information that you would get from a search engine insider as it is so specific and yet AFAIK no one has ever said anything like. This sounds more like your own speculation then anything else as nothing you mentioned above had anything to do with relevance which is what search engines are after.

[domainpubber]

Not being a reputed SEO expert, I'm certain that John and others will flame me for posting this, but my actual experience has shown that it is easier to get higher SERPs with older sites than very new sites, which seem to need many more backlinks to get similar results.

I have NO idea how the algo works and won't pretend to even guess, but an old site that has stagnated, once given new and quality content DOES get ranked. Again, this is my own experience only and I have built up both new and old sites with poor, good and great quality content. Without the quality, it doesn't really matter, but given equal quality of content and quantity of inlnks, I still find that an older domain will rank higher.

Call me stupid. Call me crazy. I'm just telling you what I have experienced with my own sites.

[internetdominus]

Do you have any other evidence to back this up other then "I have seen this"? This seems like information that you would get from a search engine insider as it is so specific and yet AFAIK no one has ever said anything like. This sounds more like your own speculation then anything else as nothing you mentioned above had anything to do with relevance which is what search engines are after.

That is why every sentence I wrote clearly says "might" or "assume"...as you "might" know, nothing is sure in SEO...

[stymiee]

Not being a reputed SEO expert, I'm certain that John and others will flame me for posting this, but my actual experience has shown that it is easier to get higher SERPs with older sites than very new sites, which seem to need many more backlinks to get similar results.

I have NO idea how the algo works and won't pretend to even guess, but an old site that has stagnated, once given new and quality content DOES get ranked. Again, this is my own experience only and I have built up both new and old sites with poor, good and great quality content. Without the quality, it doesn't really matter, but given equal quality of content and quantity of inlnks, I still find that an older domain will rank higher.

Call me stupid. Call me crazy. I'm just telling you what I have experienced with my own sites.

There are so many factors that affect rankings it is hard to pin it down on the age of a site or domain. There are so many other likely culprits that this would need to be towards the bottom of the list of possibilities.

[stymiee]

That is why every sentence I wrote clearly says "might" or "assume"...as you "might" know, nothing is sure in SEO...

Actually there is a lot to be sure about and a lot you can be confident in. That whole "nothing is sure in SEO" is just a lot of people's way of backing up speculation. I find good logic and, whenever possible, good evidence is better then simply saying "nothing is sure in SEO".