With so many links on the page the PR gained by each site would not be vey much. I think the money could be put to better uses.
If you have a Commercial site then it would be better to spend the money on directories which would give you PR AND Customers.
If non-commercial, then go hunting for links as per normal.
dicey... very dicey.. and bloody expensive to boot.
1 Google doesn't like any hint of PR selling and is likely to slap a penalty on if found.
2 Google reputedly only indexes the first 100 kb of a page... tough luck if you're at the bottom.
:) I'd keep looking.
Well the the links page is alphebeticle and I would end up about smack dab in the middle so I would be withing that 100 kb.
As far as penalties Trust E is on of the biggest names on the net I doubt google is about to penalize sites that our linked to from any of its pages.
Does anyone no for sure that the amount of pr distributed to a website is related to the number of links on a page?
Assuming that the page was under 100kb of course
>1 Google doesn't like any hint of PR selling and is likely to slap a penalty on if found.
If it is being discussed here, consider it found. If you have a good thing use your head when it comes to exposing it.
|Does anyone no for sure that the amount of pr distributed to a website is related to the number of links on a page? |
I would venture a guess that the pr is divided by the number of links, or (please correct me if I'm wrong here) all of the pages that are linked to from this page would be a pr7.
I agree that the PR is shared but i dont think we can predict what the evontual outcome in terms of PR would be. For dure the more links on the page the lower the level of PR value that is passed out through each link.
I totaly agree that this is a very expensive way to go about getting a link. And you could spend your money better else where.
coconutz, the PR is divided by the bumber of links on the page, but there's a threshold above which the reduction is much more severe.
> With so many links on the page the PR gained by each site would not be vey much.
> but there's a threshold above which the reduction is much more severe.
I had often wondered about this very point, I believe this is the first time I see it stated explicitly.
More specific information would be appreciated (threshold, evidence).
Thanks for educating me about the mysteries of PR over the past few months!
ya we here a lot about PR but I have never heard someone say that it is divided between links on a page. Anybody with any proof or evidence I would love to hear from you.
Thanks ciml, I've often wondered about this.
> PR but I have never heard someone say that it is divided between links on a page.
This is explained in the original paper on the design of Google, The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine [www7.scu.edu.au]. The mathematical description is in section 2.1.1, with what they call an "Intuitive Justification" in section 2.1.2.
Love that intuitive justification. Reminds me of college - when you couldn't explain the complex derivation of a formula, you could always fall back on, "It's intuitive!" ;)
I could see it as a complete waste of money, all it takes is Google to lower the PR of the site with the link and your sunk.