SEO for MSN

[AussieWebmaster]

Now that the new MSN seems to be stretching out everywhere... it is time to start making some notes on optimization... what seems toi be working etc.

I see that Domain names are big, though Titles not as much, even url names can help...

[iamrussell]

I think titles are very important. I added a couple words to my title and it totally nocked me off the first ten pages. I took the extra words off and I went back to #1. It seems that the shorter the title, the better. And I've certainly seen that backlinks can get a page to the top with out anything on-page that relates to the keyword.

I think MSN gives equal weight to on- and off-page SEO.

[AussieWebmaster]

I think titles are very important. I added a couple words to my title and it totally nocked me off the first ten pages. I took the extra words off and I went back to #1. It seems that the shorter the title, the better. And I've certainly seen that backlinks can get a page to the top with out anything on-page that relates to the keyword.

I think MSN gives equal weight to on- and off-page SEO.
I am going to be doing some thorough testing of MSN in the coming weeks to see what elements have the greater impact.

[seobook]

I am going to be doing some thorough testing of MSN in the coming weeks to see what elements have the greater impact.
please do share some of the results :)

[KeywordMonkey]

I'll second that...:D

[AussieWebmaster]

Nice move Aaron now I have to do some serious work... one thing to do it for me... another to publish what all will attack...lol

[Nacho]

Make sure you have your 301's very well in place, because MSN Search continues to have URLs, which who knows where they picked them up (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=2705) but are still ranking high even though they no longer exist in most servers. Check all your keywords very carefully, because as volume (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?p=30966#post30966) continue to increase you still have time to make changes that will reflect in better conversions and ROI.

[littleman]

Early crack at it from observing my own sites...
I think inbound link text is big in the new msn. KWs in outbound links count as on page content. In one case I see a page that ranks for a term which only appears once on the page and is not in the title and metas, but that page has "authoritative" links pointing to it.

Also, looks like third level domains inherit some 'authority' from their parent domain even if the link pop for the third level itself is poor?

[Carlos Chacón]

I have notice that my website is ranking pretty much similar as in Yahoo! ....searching the same keywords.

The HUGE difference is that they are not Sponsors Results section in this new msn beta search.
In my personal opinion that is a great opportunity to show te SEO quality knowledge of all of those who says that they are SEO guys.

Good Luck!
;)

[strategicrankings]

IMHO internal links and on page content has higher importance than off page factors such as inbound links.

[creativecraig]

I would say inbound links with good anchor text is huge for the new MSN. I am ranking on competitive terms with hardly any content but with good links pointing to them!

[AussieWebmaster]

So far domain name seems to have a bigger influence that at Google. Linking from similiar C class domains are not down played as much as by Google... will keep you posted... will test impact of Title tags later this week.

[seomike]

I've noticed that MSN is counting IMAGE links in their backlinks. Might want to test the limits on that. :D

[AussieWebmaster]

I've noticed that MSN is counting IMAGE links in their backlinks. Might want to test the limits on that. :D Are you talking about links from banners etc. or the actual link to an image inside the src code.

[seobook]

related to this thread...

NickW recently posted that MSN does not much discriminate between link types well
http://www.threadwatch.org/node/1297

[yellowwing]

Think they have rolled out too quickly. And will be adjusting algorithms as time goes on.

I did a search for "Mississippi Real Estate" and the number 5 result was:

Las Vegas real estate - Nevada homes and condos
Las Vegas real estate - New Homes, Resale Homes, Condos, Rentals, and Apartments from the top Nevada realtor Home Finder Search New Homes Search All Homes Pre-Qualify Now Las Vegas Info Community Info ...
www.realestate-vegas.com

This page and it's encoding has zero mention of the word "Mississippi". In my opinion, it would be wise to keep watching but not to radically change our own pages.

Chasing MSN rankings now will be chasing smoke for awhile longer.

[hiero]

I've noticed that paying attention to on and off page keyphrase redundancy as it applies to SEO places you well in MSN's index.


Also it looks like MSN's index still has a lot to spider when you compare like results to Google's index. The index keyphrase searched for counts that Google returns are considerably higher than MSN's.

The good news is now that we have 3 major search engine companies showing 3 different sets of results one should be able to gain top results in at least one search engine! http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[AussieWebmaster]

I will have a more thorough list of tested ones by this time next week.

[seomike]

Are you talking about links from banners etc. or the actual link to an image inside the src code.

<a href="http://www.somesite.com/"><img src="..." width="" height=""></a>

This is showing up as a backlink in MSN.

I have a portfolio page on our site and a brand new client we have is showing the portfolio page as a backlink. It's just an image.

Don't know if it has weight. maybe I should test it by dropping some an alt tag with some keywords in the img tag :D

[I, Brian]

MSN likes links in number. Is that really a bad thing, though?

[AussieWebmaster]

<a href="http://www.somesite.com/"><img src="..." width="" height=""></a>

This is showing up as a backlink in MSN.

I have a portfolio page on our site and a brand new client we have is showing the portfolio page as a backlink. It's just an image.

Don't know if it has weight. maybe I should test it by dropping some an alt tag with some keywords in the img tag :D
Interesting... I would definitely try the alt tag and see what happens.... use the keyword in the domain name if there is one and see if it gets a listings for the term as well.

[sarumu1]

So I finally have something legit to contribute... instead of mooching of everyone else's plate.

The freshness of links is given great weight on MSN - much greater than Yahoo and Google.

I can give examples from my own site.

My oldest links are only six weeks old. I only have about 70 to 80 links (that's it, all directory listings).

My target keyword pair lands me between #19 and 23 in MSN. I am yet to show up anywhere in google/ yahoo for the same pair of keywords.

The # 1 site on google/ yahoo shows up at #8 on MSN.

Here's the doozie:

the #7 site on google which is #4 on yahoo doesn't show up anywhere in MSN (MSN returns 250 results for the selected keyword pair) - this site has far more backwards links than my site - I can't give an accurate number because I don't have access to good tools - I'm sure most of you do - so I'll name this site so you can calculate the ball park number of links they have: www.breastimplants4you.com

So that's that. Probably the only useful info that I'll provide for this calendar year.

Subbu.

[AussieWebmaster]

My oldest links are only six weeks old. I only have about 70 to 80 links (that's it, all directory listings).

That is impressive.... I usually limit the directory submissions to about 15-20.

The freshness of links could be one part - but the weight of directories could likely be more than a single site.

I have a few sites I can do some testing on... and even a few left over for the sandbox plays I am trying.

[sarumu1]

The weight of directory listings may explain how my site ranks in part, but that doesn't do a good job explaining the site characterized as the "doozie" in my post above. They have several high quality directory links, including DMOZ - which I don't have.

JMHO. Cheers, Subbu.

[creativecraig]

I have a site with maybe 100 backlinks all directory listings, I would not class any of them quality directories - the site ranks well for some half decent competitive phrases on MSN.

Nowhere to be seen on Google, with a few listings on Yahoo!

[ferret77]

I would disagree with title tags carrying a large weight in MSN

many totally non-competitive terms my sites rank for solely on a title tag in yahoo and google, don't come up at all in msn

[AussieWebmaster]

The weight of directory listings may explain how my site ranks in part, but that doesn't do a good job explaining the site characterized as the "doozie" in my post above. They have several high quality directory links, including DMOZ - which I don't have.

JMHO. Cheers, Subbu. The interesting thing about your "doozie" is that most of the links Google is counting are internal and one other forum.
I am now going to see how many duplicated numbers MSN counts from the same IP. Though a lesser weight for internal links could be a suggestion.

[smindsrt]

MSN likes links in number. Is that really a bad thing, though?

I don't think so but That's because I have a site that is 2-3 weeks old on the first page for the word "SEO" :)

The sites in the rankings are still relevant and I think everyday non-SEO people will like the results.

[AussieWebmaster]

But they are also allowing multiple pages that redirect to the same page to be listed separately... so technically you could spam them and own the entire first page!

[Ulstrup]

Pages (sites) that ranked well in Google about one year ago (before Googles emphasis on directories) has good rankings in MSN today. Surely onpage items weights at MSN. High KW density + title especially.

[Marcia]

The problem is, if sites are doing well at Yahoo and/or Google but not MSN, it would be silly to make any changes to them.

[indosearch]

It seems that the shorter the title, the better.

interesting. what length are we talking about? is 20 words still too long?

[indosearch]

So far domain name seems to have a bigger influence that at Google.
what about urls? would "www.domain.com/homepage" rank lower than just "www.domain.com". thanks.

[indosearch]

The problem is, if sites are doing well at Yahoo and/or Google but not MSN, it would be silly to make any changes to them.
very true. i didn't care about MSN 2 months ago when they only sent one-fifth the amount of visitors compared to google. but now MSN sends me more visitors than google does. so i'm more willing to optimize for MSN. would you think that's a good approach? thanks.

[massa]

The wonderful thing about having three major search services now is not so much how to rank in each one respectively, but more for the demographics. Different people use different services for different reasons and as always, it's all about the conversions.

With domains being so cheap and links being begged, borrowed, sold and stolen at the speed of life, coupled with sophisticated content generation and management scripts, the cost of generating qualified traffic that produces a positive return has been cut by a third. This three legged wrestling match should silence those who bemoan the poor little guy being pushed out by cyber suits with deep pockets. It won't of course, but it should because now just about anybody can buy a domain, target G OR Y OR M and generate traffic at least under enough keywords to produce a profit.

I'm so excited, sometimes I have to go into the restroom and grab a hold of myself !!! This takes me back to the days of Infoseek/Alta Vista/Hot Bot/ Excite/Lycos. Everyone is spidering fast, indexing fast and generating traffic fast. Each one is similar yet different enough the general population still needs to rely on a professional to de-mistify the process. Money, big money, is flying through the air and everyone smells it and wants it.

For the noobees and wannabees, the bar to search engine marketing just got lowered to the point that just about anyone can place somewhere for something and then convince themseslves they are real SEO's. They will even make a living because if you place on just one major, the client will bitch, but they still need the one and that makes it hard for them to quit. As long as you put the focus into converting that traffic, there is profit and you are in business.

For the real professionals with the resources to dominate all three, the bar just got raised because while one top spot on MSN may keep a low-end client from cancelling, the one engine won't deliver much traffic. BUT, for the SEO who can get one or more sites in the top of all three, and get them there fast, that is where the traffic will come from that justifies those 5 and 6 figure checks every month. Convert THAT traffic and there are literally billions of dollars to be made.

These are bright times indeed my brothers.

I think Aaron may get filthy rich of the ole SEO book alone. I wish I had thought of doing something like that, but I'm afraid I just wouldn't know what to say.

[AussieWebmaster]

They count all links internal and external.... love anchor text from anywhere... count text on page and rate according to the usual but drill down to include img names, url page names, sub folder names etc.