There is a controversy over 301 redirects. First, Google recommends them in the case of multiple domain names. This is a given, as it is outlined in the Google webmaster section. No where does it tell you about what type of alias domain names you should or should not choose, or how many you can have. (other than misleading intent such as misspelled trademarks, etc.) The most valuable domain names are generics, commonly owned by affiliates in that specific industry relating to the subject domain name. The values are a testimonial to the frequent use by industry leaders; reflected by the high prices of generic domain names. If you sold widgets, and gold widgets were “all the rage”, then to own Gold Widgets dot com would only make sense if it was acquirable.
The method of application in our preference is as a domain alias, and a 301 permanent redirect script installed in your .htaccess file by your web administrator. This script needs to be added beyond the alias application. Servers are set up that way, and with the redirect pointing to the www version of the primary domain name through the redirect script, allows the use, and recognition of being the source for the chosen redirect domain names.
Multiple redirects and keyword domain names have been used for years, as I have some interesting examples.
Search Movie – Movies showed up for me. Movie dot com is the fit. It is a domain alias, and redirects to the www version of Movies dot com. Type the variations in your address bar and see how it resolves. This is properly employed as an alias with a 301 redirect script in the htaccess file. We also do it with SEODomainNames.com, resolving to the www.
Search Loans. Loans dot com is on that page. It redirects to a “large name” bank website, but does not search that way. Loans dot com comes up. The domain was set up as a separate domain and resolves to iteslf, yet redirects once hit, to another domain. This does allow the name to be searched as the domain is written, but does redirect it to another site. This leaves room for abuse, if the redirect is not ethical. I use ethics, because the intent of this use is ethical. It does allow the name to be searched, but is risky and could be construed as misrouting, or could be used as misrouting. Google would not like that. That is a risky version of a redirect. It is not our recommended practice. This is an example of a redirect employed on the web page, Loans dot com.
Search Books dot com. Now see who shows up. Type in the company name, as you see literally, as a dot com in your address bar or search. The same site shows up. These are both set up to bring up the same content. I would not recommend this. Loans dot com is not a 301 redirect, shows up with both the www and non www version when typed in the address bar. Oddly enough, the company name is indeed a 301 redirect because it only resolves to its www version. It is apparent that they are pulling up the same pages with the risk of duplicate content. How this was set up is beyond me with the loans dot com name completely duplicating the entire site. One a 301 redirect, one not, both pull up the same page, this will require some occupational deciphering. It is nothing I want to do. Notice there are no meta tags on “either” of these “books” sites, and I use the word “either” loosely. This sheerly comes up raw page rank, as well as a well key worded domain name. They both share pr8. Hmmm. That is indeed about as good as page rank gets, but both rank 8? This is indeed treading on dangerous ground for duplicate page content. A good clean 301 redirect should be employed. They will still get the type in for books dot com. The inbound link as books dot com help; how googlebot views you. How you are viewed by googlebot is important too! A 301 redirect will pool any link value from books dot com to the company site too, like they need it! There are white hat benefits to a domain alias, 301 redirect. It’s ok when properly employed, widely used, and our way to go.
Years ago I made a mistake, when firefox was new. (We all make mistakes as we learn). Firefox could identify search words in the body, and I mistakenly placed a list of 301 redirect domain names in the same color of the background in the bottom of the footer. Yes, I got kicked off for having words the same color of the background. It was a list, not linked, of my redirects. When I took the list off and wrote to get re accepted, I explained I didn’t intend on leaving them there, and did not proof my footer very often. That was true, and I did forget. They matched the background, so it could only be seen in the html view. I used Front Page back then. I also explained the names were not linked, and 301 redirect was employed properly, and that I had cleaned up the hidden words. Google re accepted me two weeks later. It was the longest two weeks of my life because I knew it could have been much longer! Our traffic went to zero! No one could find us if they tried, without typing us in! The moral of the story is don’t hide anything, and domain alias application of 301 redirects is fine. OK, I have a criminal SEO record, only one time, and it was my web site. I learned a valuable lesson back then that drove me to learn white hat, reputable SEO practices.
I have not had a problem since. I read the rules a lot now, and stay between the lines. Good content when you are found is still the best reason for a website. Have something to see when they get there! So what do you think? I am up for a debate on this subject. We think it is a great and proper use for your extra domains!
If you don’t use this method and do not have a site for each domain name you own, and did nothing at all with the extra names, wouldn’t that be domain squatting? There are domainers and companies with Multiple Domain Names! Ah Haa, so that is what they do with them!
