I too am working along the same lines, though using specific geo domains. To me the most important thing is the association people - you know real people, not domainers or Google, etc. put on the site names.
Because of the linking algorithm used by Google it may well hurt your interlinking sites a little, but if people link from one site in the network to another and accept the link as logical then you will be creating a kind of 'branding' that may benefit your network far more than any loss you may suffer from search engine algorithm biases. (It should also be noted here that of course the algorithms used change repeatedly and in my view unpredictably, so what may today be seen as a disadvantage may be neutral tomorrow or even positive in the future.)
Of course by having a network of sites you are allowing the branding of the network as a whole whilst you also have the ability to tweak the design of each site so it is more suited to the individual site whilst remaining within the general brand appearance. The bottom line though has to be what the public both want and expect. Here the tweaking can be very beneficial, and it will allow variation, and looking ahead the ability to carry out specific future changes to individual sites that would be difficult to achieve acceptably on a single site.
Single sites are often looked as a being better as they cost less (only one renewal fee) and of course things like alexa ranking will be higher for a single site than will be achieved by any of the individual sites in a network, and this could be a downside. However, it is more than possible that the total number of visitors obtained by a network could easily be more than an individual site because people could associate with a specific site within the network whilst they may not with the individual site, this would likely lead to increased 'bookmarking' of individual sites of the network over the rate achieved by posiibly a single site.
This has most probably been a totally incomprehensible post, but I hope you follow my lines of argument.![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()









Reply With Quote
...








Bookmarks