I people are being a touch hard on your here. The primary reason for this idea is this bit of text, which was included in a Google Patent.
Quote:
|
Valuable (legitimate) domains are often paid for several years in advance, while doorway (illegitimate) domains rarely are used for more than a year. Therefore, the date when a domain expires in the future can be used as a factor in predicting the legitimacy of a domain and, thus, the documents associated therewith. - Longer Domain Registration Can Increase Search Engine Listings | VISIONEFX |
You can find the same perspective reflected from this man who worked for Yahoo, and various other sources.
Quote:
|
Fact. There is a minor benefit to domains with longer registrations. It shows that the site is planning on being around a while, and makes it more costly for spammers to buy disposable domains. Just like when the IRS determines who to audit, each “flag” is worth a certain amount, and if you score too highly, boom - you’re audited. A single year registration is just one flag. - The SBS Interview: Jon Glick, pt. 2 |
The idea is out there and is at least acknowledged, if not actually understood. I suspect that Google's interest is also on no greater scale than a "flag" and not a direct "register for longer and your website will do better" relationship. Nobody knows what effect, if any, registration length has but the logic that reputable sites are expecting to be around for longer is solid. Spammers are not in the business of long-term or paying out any more than they have to, indeed their business relies on paying very little.
I should disclaim that I don't sell SEO advice - at least, not unless it is by special request - but in my inexpert opinion I wouldn't go out of your way to kowtow to this factor. If renewal day rolls around again and you are sure you won't be changing your domain, it doesn't cost you to register for longer so if you're happy to do so then why not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samizdata  Sure, you can register a .com for ten years, but Google doesn't really care.
I have UK domains that do very nicely on both google.com and ALL its regional sites. |
Just because a site is doing well already, it doesn't mean that it couldn't be doing better or that other factors are irrelevant or will have no effect. It's quite easy to see this by the number of websites that rank highly in Google yet are missing some of even the most obvious SEO advantages.
BBC News, for instance, ranks top in Google for the search "News" yet they ignore the standard advice of putting the site name last in the page title. They use invalid HTML. They have poor URL structure as far as SEO goes. No doubt there are plenty more areas they fall down in. Does that mean just because they are doing nicely that other factors won't allow them to do even nicer? 'Course not.