Jasmine Directory

Upon my evaluation of Jasmine Directory on September 2, 2013, I have assigned a rating of 75%.

Jasmine Directory has been in our top ten during the first and second quarters of 2013. During the first quarter, it placed number eight and, in the second quarter, using different criteria, it was number three, behind Aviva Directory and Best of the Web.

Jasmine is relatively new in the directory industry, being established in 2009. It first appeared in the Internet Archive on June 5th of that year.

The index page of Jasmine Directory has a PageRank of four. Second-level pages have a PageRank of three, while the PageRank of third-level categories range from zero to three. There aren't very many fourth-level pages, but the ones I have seen didn't have PageRank, which is not unusual.

Its Alexa Traffic Rank is 16,689. Its SEMRush Rank and SEMRush Search Traffic is 226,721 and 1,233 respectively. The MajesticSEO number is 282,979. Its MozRank is 8.08 and the Domain Authority of the directory is 55/100, as determined by Moz.

Jasmine has received 22 StumbleUpon stumbles, 6 Twitter tweets, 21 Facebook likes, and 165 Google +1 clicks.

There are two submission options. A standard review for inclusion in the directory costs $19, while an express review is $39, both one-time fees. Express listings permit up to five deep links, and will appear above regular listings in the category.

During the third quarter of 2013, as in the second quarter, we are evaluating web directories from the perspective of a potential directory user, so any search engine optimization concerns won't come into play as far as our assessment goes. I added that information for those who may be interested in it.

In our review, Jasmine Directory will be assessed in five general areas: aesthetics (10%), content (25%), intuitiveness (20%), quality (20%), and usefulness (25%).

Aesthetics - 8/10

Jasmine Directory uses a color scheme that includes a header with a blue denim background, and mostly white text, while the body of the page is separated into sections with off-white and a couple of shades of gray backgrounds, and blue and black text, which nicely divides the various content areas of the directory without being obtrusive.

The index page scrolls vertically, which I don't generally like, but the main menu is above the fold.

The main would be symmetrical if not for Internet & Online Marketing, using three words and an ampersand, and Regional, using only one word.

Subcategory pages feature well written, uniquely authored, and informative category descriptions in the left column, with subcategories and and site links in the right, which is not only useful but attractive, especially as the category description include a photo or image.

Content - 16/25

Since Jasmine Directory's server seemed to be handling the Scrutiny program without difficulty, I let it run its course, finding 368 bad links among the 15,775 links that it checked, on 9,176 pages. At least three-fourths of the links that were identified as bad were time outs, which are not necessarily bad links, so Jasmine Directory has a pretty low ratio of bad to good links. Scrutiny also does not differentiate between internal and outgoing links, so not all of these represent outgoing directory links.

Although Jasmine does not have as many links as Best of the Web, or even Aviva Directory, it has a fair number of links and its category structure is not built out deeper than it needs to be, so there are no empty pages, at least not that I have come across, and I clicked through several of them.

All of its topical categories are built out well, but its regional tree is awfully skimpy. For example, none of the U.S. state categories are built out beyond the single digits, there are only nineteen listings in all of the United Kingdom, which has no subcategories, and Oceania has only seven listed sites, and eight empty categories.

From the types of site listings that are found in the directory, it is clear that the directory staff does seed its categories with site listings, but its regional tree is far too light.

Intuitiveness - 17/20

Jasmine's category name choices are reasonable, so I wouldn't think that a directory user would have difficulty figuring out where anything is supposed to be. Additionally, @links are used to help direct users to similar categories, and to prevent the creation of duplicate category structures.

Not everything is where it is supposed to be, however. There are often multiple pages of site listings beneath upper-level categories when many of them could more appropriately be placed in subcategories. Somewhat less obtrusive is the practice of displaying featured listings ahead of regular listings.

The directory's category structure is perhaps shallower than it needs to be, but this could be better assessed if the directory's existing listings were moved to appropriate categories.

Quality - 14/20

Some of the site descriptions in the directory include full, grammatically correct, sentences, and others use well-developed sentence fragments which, although not composed of proper sentences, are nevertheless descriptive of the site. Others are on the skimpy side.

Some of the directory's listings use the site's domain name in lieu of a proper title. In some cases, this was perhaps done because the site itself does that but, in others, it isn't clear why this is done. For example...

Helping users to learn what an asset is worth in your business.
* The listed site uses "Valuator" as a title.

Offering one of the widest selections of bedding, bath accessories, and home decor at deep discounted prices.
* Should be Bed Bath Store

CK Wreaths.com
Your source for quality silk floral wreaths, arrangements, tropical floral, wall decor and candles.
* This site is no longer active.

Mbmcarpentry.com: Vinyl Siding Prices
Calculate the vinyl siding prices for your home and choose between different vinyl siding colors free.
* There is no title on the site itself, but the business name is MBM Building and Contracting, or MBM Construction, either of which would be a more appropriate title.

Other quality items include the relatively low number of bad links, along with the fact that the directory's server was able to withstand a full scan by my Scrutiny program without slowing in its response. Other directories have slowed considerably, or crashed, as Scrutiny is an aggressive program.

Usefulness - 17/25

The topical categories of Jasmine Directory have enough listings to be useful as a directory, although more would be better. Its regional categories are too sparse to be useful, however.

Its category descriptions are excellent. This, in fact, is a feature that makes Jasmine Directory stand out from most other directories.

Extra Credit - 3

Jasmine Directory features a blog that is regularly updated, so I'll give it one additional point for that. Jasmine also includes a page that lists recently rejected submissions, along with the reasons for their rejection. I find this to be helpful, although particularly to site submitters. Lastly, I really appreciate the directory's category descriptions, so I'll add another point for that.

Overall Ratings - 75%
Upon my evaluation of Jasmine Directory on September 2, 2013, I have assigned a rating of 75%.


Jasmine Directory would rank considerably higher if its regional categories were better built out. This is a common problem among general comprehensive web directories, and it stems from the fact that site submitters are often unwilling or hesitant to submit to regional categories. Because the appropriate placement of a site within regional is usually at the deeper levels of the directory, submitters are concerned with the lack of PageRank. Some directories have opted to deal with this problem by offering a reduced rate, or even a free review, for submissions to its regional tree, while others have opted to direct staff personnel to concentrate their efforts in the regional categories.

Jasmine's category descriptions are beautiful, and its quality is generally good. Despite the fact that it is lacking in some areas, it is one of my favorite directories.

Keep in mind, too, that most of the directories that it is competing with have several years on Jasmine Directory, which was established in 2009. I expect good things from Jasmine Directory.


blog comments powered by Disqus