Does Google pay any attention to a top level domain when ranking websites?

[DNCredit.com]

From Search Engine Journal

 

[BiggieBiggie is verified member.]

Hi

Instead of just asking a question in the title and posting a link offsite, why not express some of the content here in your own words or how you see it as it relates to domains?

then maybe post the follow-up source.

Thanks

 

[DNCredit.com]

Point taken, biggedon (my apologies and the key points of interest in my opinion):

• that .org and .edu domains have a higher SE weighting (are these things actually traded openly in the aftermarket or is it a little nudge-nudge-wink-wink?)
• "Google does seem to perceive a top level domain as a separate word: for example, searching for [fishing net] we get more .net domains on the first page than when searching for [fishing netting]" - does this mean there is hope for .biz? Or perhaps for URL hacks like tic.kets.com?

 

[copper]

I know you can buy/sell .org, but, you need be somehow
associated with educational institution to get .edu.

I don't think .org and .edu get any special treatment.
It's just that .org and .edu are used for non-profit more than any other extension.
Thus, those sites will have less advertisements and more real contents.
And other web sites will put links to those sites.
More links mean better SE placement.
No special treatment at all

 

[tristanperry]

I personally feel that it makes a difference. A small bit of difference, but still.

Even to Google a .com must be worth most than a .newestdomaintldontheblock

 

[JMJ]

Google doesn't care what extension you have. But it would help in a circumstance such as "fishing net" and owning utilizing "fishing.net" selling fishing nets.The reason more .net's would show is because "net" is in the domain and whats in the domain is a large percentage in the search algo. Try "fishing biz" and you'll see what I mean. No one really knows how they calculate things but I've always took these things into great consideration when trying to get the best optimization.

Keyword targeted domain
Related content
related incoming links
Proper meta info
clean code

 

[harleyx]

[*]"Google does seem to perceive a top level domain as a separate word: for example, searching for [fishing net] we get more .net domains on the first page than when searching for [fishing netting]" - does this mean there is hope for .biz? Or perhaps for URL hacks like tic.kets.com?

Choose a single instance which has many unknown factors weighing on it, and infer facts based that single instance.

Faulty logic abounds. Where to start?

Get more results containing .net's with 'fishing net' than 'fishing netting'. This is true, so what does it mean?

Lets do the same thing with .com ('fishing com' 'fishing comming').

We get alot of misspellings of "coming" (who didn't see that comming!), most .coms, some .nets, and a couple others.

Looking at this as scientifically as I can, I deduce this theory:

It's possible G/Y/M search engines may interpret com, net, org, etc in the search keywords as a request from the user to provide a certain TLD.

What I find much more likely - in all likelihood it's a matter of those sites having their domain name including the keyword (com net org) in the TITLE (Welcome to somedomain.com) and near the bottom of the site in the COPYRIGHT (copyright 2005 somedomain.com), as well as other places in the text, and also being linked to as "somedomain.ORG' or 'somedomain.COM'.

TITLE, text mentions, and inbound link text are all major and well established factors for search rankings.

Beyond that, the example fishing net is a TERRIBLE example, since "fishing net" is an expression with meaning. Google even gives "related searches". Nobody says "fishing netting". Gimme a break! When you search "fishing netting" you get a bunch of websites with "fishing net(s)" right in the title.

Even further beyond that, when you ask a question consider the source of the answer. This is a domain forum, full of people who sell domains. It behooves them not to tell you a domain name with keywords in it is valuable in SE terms. Most of them probably believe what they're telling you (including the person who wrote the article).

It's much easier to believe something when it supports your vested interest, even if has no basis for truth.