The age of the domain doesn't affect a site's SERPs

[CLTMichael]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1_1NQWQJ2Q

[Sam Chapman]

Matt didn't really address the question. He talked about how long a domain was registered for, not the age of the site. From what I have looked at, age is a strong factor.

[CLTMichael]

Matt didn't really address the question. He talked about how long a domain was registered for, not the age of the site. From what I have looked at, age is a strong factor.

Correct and I agree with you. He just talked about those register companies trying to spam their product on newbies.

I would take an older domain over a new one any day!

[abcharlton]

I think that the age of the inbound links is a factor, too, but I could be wrong. Meaning, the more time that has gone by since Google first found the link, the better.

[abcharlton]

Also, this is Matt Cutts, head of anti-web spam. He's a good person to ask what not to do, but maybe not the best authority on what to do to get to the top of the SERP's (no offense, Matt Cutts worshippers). Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying he doesn't know how to get to the top, I'm just saying that he's very focused on eradicating spammers, so all of his videos and blog posts are oriented in that direction.

[Scott.Hack]

Aaron has a very good point and something that everyone should pay attention to. Matt Cutts is an employee of Google. Who tells the world what Google wants us to hear. Which is in Google's best interest. Pay attention to what Matt says, but do your own testing.

[nitsujri]

@abcharlton - It's also about not releasing trade secrets. If you watch all his videos and what questions he answers, most of them are already well known ideas that he validates.

[Halfdeck]

No one has done any real testing worth publishing re: domain age. Not even one SEO out there could run a bulletproof test on first link priority effect - which is in theory easier to prove than domain age boost. You're right - domain age and registration date are not exactly the same thing - but then ask yourself what metrics you'd use to measure domain age.

New domains have no backlinks - so of course initially they'll rank worse than an older domain. But if that older domain sat around parked for 10 years with no backlinks - well that domain isn't gonna rank any higher than a brand new domain.

SEOs have spun lies re: org and govs for years too. There's nothing special about an .org link except some .org sites may pass more link juice because compared to some other sites their in/outlink profile is cleaner.

Matt Cutts has lied in the past - he's mislead people on nofollow PageRank sculpting in order to popularize the use of nofollow. But in general, he's been way more reliable than any SEO out there hungry for rep building and traffic to state opinion as fact and exaggerate - so if you're getting your info from SEOs I'd rethink what they've been feeding you.

There are too many people out there willing to believe BS till proven wrong - instead of being smart enough to say "its possible but I'm not jumping to conclusions till I see undeniable proof" - consequently we end up with a ton of people who believe in UFOs and Santa Claus.

[linkbuildr]

I'd say it's more along the lines of not how old the domain is, but a mix of how long the domain has been indexed in Google as well as how far ahead in the future it's reg'd for.

[Sam Chapman]

A few years ago when I was learning SEO and starting to rise in the ranks for one of my terms, an agent in my office with a canned AA site with very little optimization and little original content ranked #1 for my term. Her domain was 6 years old at the time. Age was a big factor then and I think it remains one today.

What abcharlton said about age of inbound links I feel also is valid.