20/02/13 21:55 Filed in: Yahoo Directory
On February 20, 2013, I reviewed the Yahoo! Directory, and awarded it seventy-five out of a possible one hundred points.
Web Directory Review of: Yahoo! Directory
Although we all know that a listing in the web directory portion of Yahoo! will be of great benefit to any website that is listed there, I have done my best to review the directory as I would any other, and the Yahoo! Directory is not without its faults.
Aesthetics - 3/5
While there is nothing particularly special about the looks of the Yahoo! Directory, it is simple, clean, easy on the eyes, and it fits the brand in that it looks an awful lot like other parts of the Yahoo! site. As I have suggested for other directories, from a purely aesthetic standpoint, I believe that if some top-level categories consist of two words separated by an ampersand, they all should. It's not a big deal, I know, but I like to point it out anyhow.
Taxonomy - 9/10
The taxonomy of the Yahoo! Directory is fairly excellent. Making good use of @links, even when the user might make a wrong choice while clicking down through the categories, he is likely to be shown the way back to where he wanted to go. The category and subcategory structure of the Yahoo! Directory is very deep, but the directory has the listings to warrant it, for the most part.
Quality Control - 6/10
Although I know that the Yahoo! Directory maintains a staff of editors who review submissions and provide maintenance tasks on the directory, I have come across several listings with no site descriptions at all, and others with descriptions that consist of only a few words, and were not very descriptive at all. While there are some very good descriptions, I would have to say that the larger percentage were somewhat less than descriptive. Looking through several of its categories, I haven't found any that were obviously misplaced, however.
I don't see is so much in the directory's topical categories but, in its Regional tree, clicking down to the city level is often like climbing down a rabbit hole; you never know what's going to be at the bottom, often nothing. I do know, from personal experience, that sites submitted to the directory at the level of a small city, with few or no listed sites, is far more likely to be accepted as a free submission than are those submitted to its topical tree. In fact, the Yahoo! editors listed a county history site that was deep-linked from one of my domains once, when I hadn't even submitted it, so they do at times go out looking for site listings. Their Regional tree could stand more of it, but I am not seeing this problem in its topical categories, which comprises the bulk of the directory. I haven't come across any dead listings.
Google Page Rank - 9/10
The main page of the Yahoo! Directory carries a Google Page Rank of 8. I have come across subcategories six levels deep that still carried a GPR of 4, so there's no doubt that the Yahoo! Directory is a valuable place to have your site listed. I wish I could afford it. By my assessment criteria, because internal pages have page rank, I am adding one point to its main page GPR of 8.
Alexa Traffic Rank - 5/5
The Alexa Traffic Rank of the Yahoo! Directory is 4, and only three sites in the world do better than that, and they are Google, Facebook, and YouTube. The Yahoo! Directory is ahead of Amazon.com, eBay and Wikipedia.
SEO Ranking - 5/5
Let's see. The Yahoo! Directory's SEMRush Rank is 4. The SEMRush Search Traffic is through the roof, at 157,871,149. It has 4,950,000 pages indexed in Google, and its Majestic SEO backlink number is 18,621,539,617. On a search of "web directory" in Bing, the Yahoo! Directory is number four on page one in Bing, with the Environment Web Directory, Wikipedia and Best of the Web beating it out. On the same search through Google, it is near the bottom of the second page of the SERPs. Strangely, in Yahoo itself, the Yahoo! Directory is the fifth result on the first page, behind the Google Chrome web browser page, the Environment Web Directory, the Wikipedia page on web directories, and Best of the Web.
Directory Content - 9/10
There are a huge number of sites listed in the Yahoo! Directory, and many of them have been added by Yahoo staff or accepted through free submissions.
SEO Content - 5/5
I don't know of a web directory that has more peripheral content than Yahoo. Besides everything that it has on its main domain with its free email and other tools, the directory also includes images, video, and blogs.
Cost for Review - 5/10
The Yahoo! Directory does allow free site submissions, and I have had a few sites accepted into its directory for free; they were, as I can recall, all informational pages that were submitted to subcategories of its Regional tree; unfortunately, the lower levels of the Regional tree are among the few places in the Yahoo! Directory that don't have page rank. The vast majority of sites that I have submitted to the Yahoo! Directory via the free submission route were not accepted, or at least not yet. When accepted, it can take a long time and no one is going to write to tell you whether it was accepted or not, despite the fact that they ask for your contacts. My understanding is that the more commercial your site appears to be, the less likely it is to be accepted for free, and I guess that makes sense. I just submitted my directory, so perhaps one day, I'll see what that leads to.
The more common way to have a website listed in the Yahoo! Directory is by paying for it, and the cost is $299, paid annually. I don't know from personal experience since I have never been able to afford to pay to have a site listed in the Yahoo! Directory, but I have been told that they don't always remove sites if they are not renewed after the first year, so you might consider that as a possibility.
As far as scoring this assessment criteria, I am going to split the difference. I could give them ten points because they do have an avenue to submit a site to the directory for free, yet it's awful darned difficult to have a site accepted into the directory for free. Primarily, their directory is fee-based, and the cost of $299 would place one point away from zero points in my assessment criteria as a paid directory. So, I will split the difference and give it a five.
Reputable Practices - 10/10
I don't believe that Yahoo is in the business of cheating you out off the $299 you might pay them for a listing.
Extra Credit - 3/10
The Yahoo! is a great directory, but much of what I might add here has been covered in one of the other areas. They do have a a suggestion section, linked from the main category page, where people can point out errors or make suggestions to improve the directory, and others can discuss the suggestions, and even vote on them, and I can see that Yahoo employees are taking part in the discussions.
Overall Rating - 75/100
Assessing the Yahoo! Directory by the criteria that I established prior to beginning the first round of web directory assessments, I have given the directory seventy-five out of a possible one hundred points, which is the highest score achieved from the directories reviewed so far.
It is quite likely that I was harder on the Yahoo! Directory than I would have been had some mom and pop directory been able to achieve the same thing. Nevertheless, the Yahoo! Directory is the high scorer so far, and I think it's fair to say that this is the directory that most site submitters would like to be in, if they could afford it.