Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

Look guys... the whole "age of the domain" thing is something that started in 2005 I believe (whenever the Florida Update was that really started getting networks banned en masse) - Google started using a new set of metrics to identify spam networks and ban domains. People quickly realized that older domains were not getting banned and started buying every crappy nonsensical domain in every auction online for 50-100-200-1000.00 as long as it was not newly registered.

This also was of course a very short lived advantage FOR SPAMMERS that LASTED VERY BRIEFLY as Google again got on top of this.

This is the origin of the "age of domain" discussion in this context. We are talking about pure age of the domain vs age of the website.

Think about this rationally (without getting into the mechanics of search engines)... Google is providing the most relevant results for a given search query. The age of the domain, does nothing to make a result more relevant. Claiming it somehow does, simply exposes ones naivete of Google and other search engines and how they function.

What is being suggested here is that if i throw up a shitty site on a domain registered yesterday or a domain registered 10 years ago, they will be treated differently as if one is somehow better quality content, more relevant content and is exactly what the searcher is looking for using this single metric as the deciding factor... that's just not how it works.

You don't need to be an SEO genius to understand this. you don't need to be an SEO genius to understand that a 10 year old domain that's been parked and a 1 day old domain, both going live on the same day do not provide better or worse results based on their age.

Saying a domain is worth X,XXX based on how old it is and never having indexed content is retarded. applying a scale over a period of years to suggest it increases in value over time based on its age is equally retarded.

Saying a domain will automatically start showing in SERP's for various search queries based on its AGE alone (ignoring all other factors that contribute to googles crawling, prioritizing pages, indexing pages and handling search queries) is equally retarded. ANY domain can be indexed in minutes... but where it ranks for various search queries depends on all the usual factors, regardless of age.

look at it another way... if age offered a substantial advantage in search engines, we would be buying and selling domains based on age.... but we don't ... do we? Every domain forum would be full of people wanting to buy domains that are XX years old. Every auction would be quick to let you know a domain is XX years old... every spammer on the planet would be running around offering to buy any domain that was XX years old.

... and although this sometimes does actually happen by the occasional naive webmaster, this is not a standard consideration to buying domains or domain valuation for a reason. if it offered an advantage, it would be.

Age of the domain might play some minor role IF it has indexed content for that period of time.

These discussions are the product of myths and 1/2 truth's that often become fact, no matter how irrational or easy to verify they are, as they continue to be echoed across blogs and forums by people who parrot SEO info that they read on some shitty blog the night before.