DA & Citation/Review Site Value

[Stefan Somborac]

I have a question that sort of merges two ideas:

1.) I've seen arguments that citations from sites with a higher DA are more valuable.

I know Rand Fishkin developed DA with his grandfather (I think I read that story in Rand's book "Lost and Founder") and that it's not an official Google measure. I also understand that it's based on the PageRank model, which is all about backlinks.

Citations, which might not have a backlink at all, lend to Prominence. (i.e. repeated mention of a business)

So, I think DA is a reasonable proxy but not a golden rule.

2.) Google looks at other review sites to get an overall rating for a business. Which other review sites Google examines varies by industry. However, these other review sites show up in the knowledge panel, so you know what Google is looking at.

We know the words in reviews from other sites create an association between the business and those words. That helps a business rank better when those words are in a search query.

So, it makes sense to me that any review site Google displays in the KP is worth using for review diversification.

1.) + 2.) See the SERP in the screenshot below. This shows the KP for the only pet shop in a small town. It includes a rating from Canada247 | Find businesses and places which is a typical business directory.

DA=1

Based on DA alone, some might argue that it's a useless citation.

Given that Google is pulling it into the KP makes me think it's valuable.

Interesting case!

Thoughts on DA for citations? Thoughts on picking sites for review diversification? (I've obviously presented my opinions. Looking for supporting evidence and conflicting thoughts!)

 

[Phil Rozek]

@Stefan Somborac, here are the main things I pay attention to:

1. Does the site rank somewhere on the first couple of pages of results for a search term you care about?

2. Does the site rank on the first page (or two) of results when you search by name for a specific high-ranking competitor?

3. Can customers write reviews on it? (If so, often the answer also is "yes" to points #1 and #2, or to both.)

Also relevant are questions like whether anyone uses the site, and whether it offers a link that passes PR. But those are down the list of concerns.

I wouldn't pay attention to DA, partly because most directories have high DA, even if they're crappy sites in every other respect.

 

[Yan Gilbert]

Given that Google is pulling it into the KP makes me think it's valuable.

I agree with that.

I never look at DA, but a few other things I tend to check is if the citation page is indexed, and/or if it is showing as a backlink in Search Console.

 

[JoshuaMackens]

I have a question that sort of merges two ideas:

1.) I've seen arguments that citations from sites with a higher DA are more valuable.

I know Rand Fishkin developed DA with his grandfather (I think I read that story in Rand's book "Lost and Founder") and that it's not an official Google measure. I also understand that it's based on the PageRank model, which is all about backlinks.

Citations, which might not have a backlink at all, lend to Prominence. (i.e. repeated mention of a business)

So, I think DA is a reasonable proxy but not a golden rule.

2.) Google looks at other review sites to get an overall rating for a business. Which other review sites Google examines varies by industry. However, these other review sites show up in the knowledge panel, so you know what Google is looking at.

We know the words in reviews from other sites create an association between the business and those words. That helps a business rank better when those words are in a search query.

So, it makes sense to me that any review site Google displays in the KP is worth using for review diversification.

1.) + 2.) See the SERP in the screenshot below. This shows the KP for the only pet shop in a small town. It includes a rating from Canada247 | Find businesses and places which is a typical business directory.

DA=1

Based on DA alone, some might argue that it's a useless citation.

Given that Google is pulling it into the KP makes me think it's valuable.

Interesting case!

Thoughts on DA for citations? Thoughts on picking sites for review diversification? (I've obviously presented my opinions. Looking for supporting evidence and conflicting thoughts!)

I agree with everything you said.

I also think it's about leverage. To me, if it costs $10 per directory, do I want to be put on 350 directories? No. If it costs 1 cent, do I want to be put on 350 directories even if their metrics (DA, etc.) are low? Absolutely. The same goes for time. If it takes me 15 minutes per directory sign up do I want to sign up for 350 directories? Heck no. If it takes me 1 second per directory? Absolutely.

I don't think you need to worry about if a directory makes sense or not if you can leverage well. If you can't (which is often the case), then yes, you do need to pick and choose. And the criteria you laid out is a good way to pick and choose.

But with the inexpensive services out there for citations these days, I think you can leverage relatively well and not have to worry if you should or shouldn't waste your time or money getting on a site. When you leverage well, you hardly use any time or money.

Also, I'm going to dissent on DA. I do look at DA. If all things are equal and DA is the difference between a 1DA site vs a 100DA site, yes, by all means, choose the 100.

While DA is not PR, it's a good indication of the popularity of a site. I use it as a relative metric, not a hard and fast metric. A site with a DA of 40 could actually have a lower PR than a site with a DA of 30. But I would be willing to bet money that a site with a 100DA has a higher PR than a site with a 1DA, if you catch my understanding.

So I definitely use DA. But only as one metric among many.

But for citations you also need to consider things others have mentioned such as indexing, does it show up in SERPS, etc. as well as whether the link is followed/nofollow.

My whole point though is the conversation about "how many citation sites should I be on" is really moot if you leverage.

But I agree with your original post. Your thinking is right on.