| 9:50 pm on Mar 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
High PR does NOT equal higher position in the SERPS.
Anyone who would tell you otherwise is giving misinformation.
PR is just one small factor out of about 100 that determines where your listing will show up for any given keyword search.
Instead of focusing on your competitor's site's PR (and why yours is higher), focus on your competitor's use of actual keywords in the Title/Description/Body Text. Find out how that compares to what you're doing, then adjust your content to mimic what your competitor is doing. (keyword position in text, keyword density, etc...)
Your competitor is beating you in the SERPS for a reason, and its obviously not the PR.
| 9:59 pm on Mar 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
been checking and tweaking that...not getting anywhere :(
| 10:37 pm on Mar 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
How about the links coming off of your page? Are the top ranked pages "hub" pages linking to true "authority" pages? Google likes this structure, and it is easily overlooked one when trying to figure out why someone is #1.
| 10:38 pm on Mar 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have a two-week old site, still grey barred, that now ranks No. 3 and 13 for it's main keyword phrases. It has no back-links. Explain that.
Perhaps Google is trying to make up for my other site that should've been a 5 or 6 that's now a zero.
Has anybody noticed that a PR 0 is not a completely white bar? It actually has two green pixels in the top left. Is this significant of anything?
| 10:57 pm on Mar 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
the boys above don't look like they have a hub structure. But will try hub myself, thanks for that.
Even on the optimisation front they don't look like they have done much for this specific keyword.
| 11:18 pm on Mar 10, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Do you have your deep pages pointing back at your homepage?
| 8:22 am on Mar 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
yes John I do; the anchor text is: send widgets online. Incoming links from other sites also have the same anchor text
I am doing well for send widgets; and widgets online. Widgets by itself is doing poorer each month.
| 8:26 am on Mar 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
If I have a site and all throughout my pages I call them red widgets blue widgets and orange widgets compared to widgets and the anchor text is for blue widgets that will reign higher (blue widgets as a keyword that is...) If I have a site about Widgets and I have that just weighed out with anchor text links and content standing along that will do better.
| 2:59 pm on Mar 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Try incoming links using only your main keyword.
Add outgoing links to sites with very high PR.
This should help, I think.
| 3:05 pm on Mar 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Here's a question. Do you need to do well for widgets? Maybe your business could be better served by going for niche widgets or widgets niche as keywords?
I have the same issue on my site. I am getting truly creamed for widgets, but have achieved number one ranking for at least 7 other search terms that are nearly-widgets. To me, I can live with that as it seems that most of my competitors are fighting for widgets which, given that the topic is diverse and not well defined.
I have been looking at the search terms that come into the site(s) I own and have noticed a pattern that says to me that people searching for widgets are actually increasingly searching for niche widgets and widgets niche.
| 11:57 pm on Mar 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Metro, am in exactly the same position as you. But I would like to do better for widgets if I could as top ten for that is gold.
Whiz, I am implementing the outgoing links as we speak...funnily though the sites above me don't have much of outgoing links.
Question: will it help if I put links on my inside pages leading to my homepage with the word "widgets" as the solo word in the anchor text? Currently, all the links to the homepage are a lame "home". What happens when you have 2(or more) links from a page to another page with different anchor text?
| 8:55 am on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I was also wondering if the alt-tag on text links is still recognised by Google? there was some discussion on this being discontinued as I recall.
| 9:06 am on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>my overall site PR moved up a point this update and all my 2,3,4 word combinations are doing very nicely. However, am losing rank for the main word. I was no. 60 in Nov. and am down every month and am now no. 180!
Big deal. So few people drill down to #60 on a SERP I'd consider that basically close to invisible at Google. You really need to be in the top 20 or 30, and MUCH better is in the top 10.
| 10:07 am on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Does anyone have a link to a detailed article (that is current) for setting up the mose effective hub linking structure for internal links? I would like to distribute my PR as effecienty as possibe, but I am not sure of the best way to set up my internal links. Also, would it be better to use as many key words in my internal links as possible? Does linking to non-linking pages still hurt page rank?
| 11:07 am on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
rf1, my point is that I have been moving down instead of up, even though my PR is moving up
| 11:22 am on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|What is the average file size of your web pages? |
If more than 32K (HTML size) this limits you.
| 11:30 am on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I have the same issue on my site. I am getting truly creamed for widgets, but have achieved number one ranking for at least 7 other search terms that are nearly-widgets. To me, I can live with that as it seems that most of my competitors are fighting for widgets which, given that the topic is diverse and not well defined. |
on-page stuff like meta title, description, & keyword, H Tag Titles, title attributes, & keyphrases in body text is better for 2, 3 or 4 word keyphrases. Off-page stuff "all anchors" pointing to... are better as singular words... where the relevancy is can be assisted on many different keyphrase.
e.g. - >> widgets << as link would relevant to any type of "widgets".
Diversifies to targeting many, many keyphrases plus the primary keyword rather than just one.
| 11:40 am on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
will "send widgets online" incoming links do it for widgets, or should I set up many links with anchor text "widgets"?
Point noted about page size...I never really paid much attention to it. Will work on it now.
| 2:31 pm on Mar 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
What I am trying to get at in this thread, are the crtical in-page and external factors to consider after achieving higher PR. So far, others have pointed out:
1. Reducing the weight of pages to less than 32K
2. Giving outbound links to other sites with decent PR
3. Isolating the keyword in anchor text of inbound links
4. Keyword density, improve it
| 6:02 am on Mar 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have seen a site above mine with virtually same title, keywords, description, less keyword density and LESS PR - the difference I could see was the outbound link to the advertised businesses own site. I thought ranking was based on internal links?
Can anyone else confirm regarding external links.
| 6:18 am on Mar 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
#3 in your "to do" list is probably going to help you more than anything else..
Anyone that says PR is low on the "Totem Pole", and factors in with about 99 other variables, is "way off base"...
PR is not the only factor, but it makes Dave's Top 10 list... :)
There are about 10 different weighting factors that make up the majority of "ALL" SE's algo's.. And if you have a PR7 then you should be doing well..
What is the sub pages of your site PR wise?
Focus on "widgets" for your main page.. Get the link text point from other sites to your main page, shortened to just "widgets"..
Get some text links for "blue widgets", "online widgets" pointing to some sub pages... (more filtered keywords probably have better conversion ratios, but it's hard to ignore the volume of traffic that widgets can bring)...
You said you have links on your sub pages pointing back at your main page.. How many levels is your site layout?
Make your 2nd level pages count for your targeted 2/3 word phrases..
Make your 3rd level pages count for more "niche" terms...
Have 3rd level pages not only pointing back at your main page, but also at your 2nd level pages...
This ain't rocket science.. Anybody trying to fool you into believing that you need a Cray computer and an Engineer that majored in Regression Analysis to nail Google's algo, or any other SE's algo, is full of it... :)
It's just hard work, testing, and staying organized in tracking your results/failures/(and hopefully successes)...
Problem w/ G is that you got to wait awhile to see the results of your testing... :)
| 8:12 pm on Mar 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have 4 levels:
Main - Widgets - PR7
Level 2 - Widgets Online; Widgets Europe - PR6
Level 3 - Niche: Texas Widgets - PR5
Level 4 - Nice, but less Important: Red Widgets - PR4
The more important of the Level 3 are linked straight from home and have a PR6
I have already implemented Widgets from all sub-pages to home page in isolation. Am now trying to implement it from other websites.
Have also worked on Keyword denisity of a Level 2 page that was no. 11 for it's targetted keyword. Being a PR6 page, it should be freshbotted soon and we'll see if it does any better.
Very intersting thread about <H*> tags: [webmasterworld.com...]
Will report back on how the results as soon as they become visible.
| 8:32 pm on Mar 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|And if you have a PR7 then you should be doing well... |
hmmm... way off base eh?
|Why my better PR is not beating competitors? |
pr7 is featuring no 180 while all above are lower PR!
The title says it all... "should be" doing well is not the same as actually doing well.
Lower PR sites/pages commonly beat higher PR sites/pages.
And not by accident! :)
| 8:59 pm on Mar 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Fathom, I am going to try isolating the keyword in my inbound links.
But last few days I have been closely looking at the sites linking to my competitors and I find that it is not true that the anchor text to them is "widgets"; the links are made up of all kinds of words, widgets being one of them. Many of their links are images!
My study is pointing mainly to Keyword density. And like I have said in my earlier post, I am going to experiment with this in a PR6 page.
| 10:31 pm on Mar 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It is rather pointless attempting to analysis a competitor is see how they rank higher than you unless you consider "all variables".
Even "Dave's Top 10 list" does not cut it.
PageRank by itself is simply a "measurement" and alot like determining how smart a person is by measuring their hat size.
Consider this as a war. The battle field is Google's index, and each variable for good ranking is are the battles that you must win in order to defeat the enemy (your competition).
If 100 battles will hands down win the war... considering only a few... defeats the purpose of going to war.
The list of "must" considerations... including content, good professional copy, minimum and maximum total words, keyword positioning (on the page), word density for specific words, anchor text (internal & external), similar content in promitity of anchors (internal & external), relationship of adjacent pages, number of internal pages, internal link structure, file size, validation, H Tags (and proper use), bold, italic, meta titles, meta descriptions, meta keywords, title attributes, alt tags in image links, number of inbound external links, quality of external link (PageRank, sharing of PageRank, and Passed PageRank), theme of external sites linking, outbound links to authority sites, domain name, domain name of linking sites, external inbound links of linking sites (who's linking to them and the quality of those links), even distribution of link through site, number of out-going links per page, competitiveness of keyword or keyphrase... and a bunch more.
Each of these is important and none will do the job itself.
Note: if you are attempting to target something that your site in it's current form can not compete with others current forms -- your task will be in vain.
| 11:30 pm on Mar 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Why does Google attach value to font settings when tags such as bold / italic / font are now deprecated and good web design dictates they should not be used?
| 1:16 am on Mar 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
hmmm... I did not mention font elements anywhere.
As for anything that could/should/or maybe calculated -- you need to think with a PhD when writting correspondence.
| 2:11 am on Mar 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My site is moving up a few notches every month for my main category keyword and is now #4 in 2.5 million results. The following has worked for me:
1. Begin your title with the keyword.
2. Keep the title to 8 words or less.
3. Begin your description with the keyword and keep it tight.
4. If your keyword is not part of your domain, make sure that it is featured prominently in the anchor text of your links.
5. Get reciprocal links with at least PR4.
6. Try to get one way links as opposed to reciprocal links (use software like Arelis).
7. Use your keyword in the first sentence of your first paragraph.
8. Make sure that the very first sentence or header that the spiders read, have this keyword.
9. Use H1-H2 headers.
| 8:52 am on Mar 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
How old is your website, and how old are the websites of your competitors? This month I have seen many perplexing result positions and the only reason I can attribute to them is that Google seems to be giving a lot of weight to older websites. To me this is unfair and unreasonable, but it helps explain many odd results.
| This 85 message thread spans 3 pages: 85 (  2 3 ) > > |