| 12:46 pm on Jan 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Well, just to finish off this post.
I have looked at a number of competitors and it looks like the PR reduction for sites around PR4-5-6 is more or less accross the board.
So I do not expect to see any or much SERP reordering as a result of this.
I hope I am right. ;)
| 1:21 pm on Jan 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It has been a PR reduction across the board for most of the sites, except for few like Yahoo. The absolute PR value is more or less redundant.
| 3:01 pm on Jan 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yes, that’s what we experienced with our own sites and those of our competitors. A lot of sites dropped by 1. We have not seen any real change in placements. A few of our sites that dropped, if looked at honestly, you can understand, but for a couple of them it was very surprising.
One other interesting thing is that these PR changes are going very slowly through out the data centers. Still getting the old stuff now and then.
| 3:02 pm on Jan 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
all my sites increased their PR.
| 3:33 pm on Jan 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yes – many pages dropped in Page Rank, including
. [directory.google.com...] drops to PR8, which has a domino effect across the Internet for quality sites.
. shadow pages like [washtimes.com...] for [washingtontimes.com...] from PR8 to PR7
It looks like as if pages of content are valued higher – especially high quality, unique pages are valued higher.
- article pages rank fine, keep constant page ranks or even rise!
- navigation pages – important but with no unique content (only category titles or similar) rank lower or at zero
(a lot of directory sites probably dropped to nothing over night I guess… J)
This is great – so a lot of “generate 10000 pages in 1 second” sites will probably disappear pretty soon!
And visitors have no benefit from hitting a shopping directory of categories when searching for one product,
| 11:47 pm on Jan 4, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've lost my elusive PR7 again. I did lose a temporary link from a PR8 page where my site was featured for a while.
Like everyone says, it's not the PR that counts but how you do in the serps. But I sure enjoy getting the good PR. Purely an ego thing. :)
Interesting point about better PR in internal pages. I noticed that in one section and not in another. I can't figure out what is making the difference.
| 12:23 am on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I can't see any change in pagerank across several sites or their close competition.
| 1:14 am on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've seen this trend across a few fairly new sites:
Newer pages previuosly with 0 pagerank now have pagerank of 4 mostly. More established pages that already had pagerank seemed to have remained the same for the time being ... end result is many newer pages have higher pagerank than the older ones that had 2/3 pagerank!
| 4:04 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
does the reduction in PR have anything to do with Google doubling the size of the index?
| 4:05 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
yeah. Google has been real stingy with its PR this update.
| 5:13 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Since the last PR update, we added many links to one of our sites, over 450 of which already show up in G, rather than just the original 1.
PR has dropped from 5 to 4.
Although being No.1 for allinanchor for the chosen anchors, there is still no change in serps. Will happily wait a while.
The PR result however is of some interest.
| 5:17 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've been watching the PR of about 30 sites I manage in both the G. directory and the PR tool (I have a mac so the G.toolbar is not available--i use the PHP page rank tool instead which also gives the backlinks same as G. link command).
A few sites jumped up in PR and a few have dropped. Those that jumped in PR had massive traffic in last few months for one reason or another, either Christmas traffic or one was running for president (and gained backlinks). Those that dropped in PR had little or no increase in traffic (out of season keywords) and I haven't been gathering links for them recently. Only those that I have actively been gathering links for (in season keywords) have risen in PR. Also, those that have gained backlinks are gaining a higher position in the Google directory and those that haven't gained backlinks are slipping in position.
So I conclude it's mainly due to the amount of backlinks that particular site has gained--and I mean quality backlinks that pass PR. I rarely submit a link any more unless the page the link will appear on is passing PR. This can be discerned by looking at the amount of backlinks for any site ranking highly for it's major Keywords in Google search engine. If you check the backlinks often a high ranking site in the SERPS has less backlinks than those ranking below it. And if you check the backlinks you can see an increase in the quality of links vs those concentrating on link exchange software.
| 5:17 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
GranPops, My experience exactly, more links, less PR, no serps change.
| 5:25 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Where links are concerned it quality not quantity, instead of trying to amass huge amounts of links be more targeted and fussy about inbounds, get on topic, clean links
| 5:31 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Well, one site went from a 4 to a 5. Small site. All internal pages are a 5 also. I don't remember adding any significant links for months. Suspect some of the inbounds may have gone up in PR.
Another, relatively ignored, site sits at the same PR 3 it has had for a year.
A PR 5 site (that hit a 6 once about a year ago) is still a 5, but looking at the PR of internal pages I think the PR has risen. Maybe I am approaching a 6 again. This site has many links to deeper pages, so it is harder to figure the PR flow through the site.
Another PR 5 site doesn't show any significant changes. Nor does another PR 4 site.
I just don't see the reduction others are. There are really only a couple of the above sites that have experienced any increase in IBL's.
| 5:37 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I haven't dropped down in PR however I was expecting to be raised as I got several natural PR7 sites linking to me since last update. Ah well. No biggie - at least traffic seems to be getting back to normal after their whacky update before christmas.
| 6:48 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
madmatt: your links are probably still with a high dampening factor and might develop their power over the next months... expect your raise (if they are good links) maybe in April...
| 7:06 pm on Jan 5, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Visible PR is whole digits, real PR is decimal points, a change of PR up or down may be decimal points and not noticeable on PR displays, toolbar or otherwise.
7.1,7.2 or 7.001,7.002
| 7:10 pm on Jan 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
my PR dropped across one particular whole site by 1 or more - which is really odd to me.
this site has been only a 5 page site for 2 years with a PR 5 index, and pr4 internal pages - including the links.html page.
since the last pr run, i finally added 20 - 30 original articles, and have many new links, both one way and recip, plus the new internal links with all the new pages.
confused! maybe the new articles diluted the original keywords, as i've broadened the topic with the new articles.?
another PR5 site also dropped to a 4, and i haven't done a thing on that site in ages.
| 11:30 pm on Jan 6, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I noticed that bluefind directory site has no internal PR. The PR on the home page is 8, but the internal pages have no PR., and they are not using any tricks.
I also see this with other 2nd tier directory sites.
Did Google punish pay for inclusion directory sites, and if they are, then why don't they penalize YAHOO also, as they are doing the same thing.
What is good for the Goose is good for the gander.
| 3:41 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Strange one for me.
Relatively new site, launched October, had a PR0.
The index is still at PR0, but all of the internal pages have a PR4.
How can this be? Has anyone else experienced this?
| 4:21 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
PR remained the same when i would have expected it to climb as i have gained some decent links.
Not my major one in my sector increased PR , most likely from site wide links inbound ( which all show as back links ) 1600 plus pr3s to be exact. Bit dissapointed that these links had an effect to be honest , though google had that tactic behind them..even though its my own site..
| 4:21 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
joeking .... I've seen on a few sites 0 pagerank pages gain pagerank of 3 or 4 for the first time whilst pages that already had pagerank say of or 2 or 3 that I was certain would rise at the next have remained the same so far anyway? .. something fishy going on!
| 6:49 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
That last comment 'something fishy going on' does seem to ring true. This PR update (downdate?) doesnt seem at all trypical. I smell a rat but I'm not experienced enough to know what kind of rat. Whats the point in generaly reducing PR when there's an increase in links. Anybody?
| 7:36 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
PR is up or the same on most sites I checked.
| 7:45 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Seems established pages have been given little or no PR update? I don't see any logic in it?
| 7:50 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My PR remains unchanged (=5) and I don’t see changes in my immediate competitors. All we are content sites, and relatively established.
[edited by: patoruzu at 8:34 pm (utc) on Jan. 7, 2005]
| 7:51 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've seen a few sites now who's new internal pages have a higher PR than the homepage and other established ineternal pages too .. strange!
| 10:59 pm on Jan 7, 2005 (gmt 0)|
We had 3 PR5 sites - we now have 1 PR5 and two PR4s.
This seems to be a general reduction of by perhaps a half point or more. Those that were close to the 5.0 are now 4.? and the higher PR5 sites weathered the partial point drop.
If I'm not mistaken this exact same thing happened about a year and a half ago. I remember our sites all dropping 1 point. This seems to me to be a regular process as Google's index grows.
| This 52 message thread spans 2 pages: 52 (  2 ) > > |