| 3:41 pm on Oct 31, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Before talking about how to boost pagerank I think you should figure out why you want to increase your pagerank. Pagerank used to be very helpful to improve your rankings & traffic. That is no longer the case. Google continues to evolve their algorithm which decreases the value of pagerank as they add more signals to their formula.
| 4:14 pm on Oct 31, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'd take Goodroi's advice and reassess the reason why you want to increase your Page Rank.
I'd recommend reading this thread.
It's old but still really relevant and after reading it you'll have a lot better idea of which tools are worth buying.
| 9:23 am on Nov 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
There is nothing any tool to increase the page rank, only white hat SEO, SMO or PPC is the way to increase the PR. Page rank depends upon mainly two factors first the good back links and secondly the traffic on the website. So learn about the link building techniques and do that, your page rank will definitely increase.
| 9:37 am on Nov 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I would love to know how PPC (directly) increases PR. Also, traffic does not affect the PR of the website - only links can do this.
Today PageRank is a bit of an outdated concept. The toolbar value is not updated regularly. You are better off looking at the quality of each website that you would like a link on. The Moz rank of a website or page is also something else that you can check, which many people think is a more reliable rating than Google PR.
| 9:43 am on Nov 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
PR does not bring traffic, the position in the SERPS does that. A low PR site on a niche topic will happily sit at the top of the SERPS for key searches. A high PR site will still do badly if it does not contain the terms that your customers are searching on.
I have no idea what the PR of my main site is. I have built it to be in the right place in the SERPS and that is all that matters to me.
| 9:53 am on Nov 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
i think there is a confusion over terms in this thread.
Page Rank: is a score/value Google gives to any page in its index, based on the incoming links that page has, 'Page Rank' is one of many factors that determines your position in the SERPS.
| 9:57 am on Nov 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Google should never have called the term PageRank as it does cause confusion. Something like 'Link Juice Measure' or something would have been more appropriate IMO.
| 12:11 pm on Nov 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|Google should never have called the term PageRank as it does cause confusion. Something like 'Link Juice Measure' or something would have been more appropriate IMO. |
Tell that to Larry Page.
| 12:36 pm on Nov 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Dang, you beat me to it. :)
|I would love to know how PPC (directly) increases PR. Also, traffic does not affect the PR of the website - only links can do this. |
| 4:06 am on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
"Pagerank used to be very helpful to improve your rankings & traffic. That is no longer the case. "
The above statement is simply false! Assuming that your on page SEO is good and that you have no other penalties, PageRank can really help you break into the top 10 and keep you there.
I own many high pr domains and nothing works better for improving my clients rank than a contextual link on a page with real PR.
| 3:10 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Correlation is not causation.
Simply having high Pagerank does not guarantee rankings. Sites that legitimately have high Pagerank tend to have more links and those links tend to be higher quality. These sites also tend to have higher quality content which attracted those links. That higher quality content tends to generate good usage signals. The Google ranking algorithm looks at over 100 factors which includes links, content, usage and many other signals. The combination of those factors is what leads to high rankings not Pagerank.
ps You do not even know what your Pagerank is. No webmaster does. We only know what our toolbar Pagerank is. Google does not release accurate Pagerank data to the public. Toolbar Pagerank has a long history of being outdated and manipulated.
| 3:34 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I have a PR1 site thats been number one for 5 years - PR means nothing, although I'll take a PR10 link if anyone wants to offer one ;o)
| 6:49 pm on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)|
While I think it is generally foolish to disagree with goodroi, I have to say that by increasing inbound links (and increasing page rank) many of my pages are ranking higher than ever before.
So I would not want to discourage someone from increasing inbound links from quality sites.
also, I think that inbound links help to make up part of what google considers being a "brand" and that seems to affect rankings quite a bit, too.
I hope this helps.
| 7:11 pm on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Part of the confusion derives from identifying PR with what's on the toolbar. Further muddying this discussion is identifying what's on the toolbar with inbound links, as well as not making the distinction between the toolbar PageRank and the real PageRank at the Plex.
The way I understand it, Real PageRank is an indicator of how important a site is and helps determine the likelihood of how many clicks through a site a "random surfer" will go before becoming bored and leaving. This is one reason why directing links to inner pages and sections of pages helps because PageRank can be set to dampen on individual pages as well as groups of pages.
Even at the beginning, if you read the Anatomy of a Search Engine paper [ilpubs.stanford.edu], the creators of PageRank were aware of the inherent limitations of PR itself for determining relevance and they were already experimenting with position of the links on a page as well as the words surrounding the link to help improve accuracy. In the beginning they were highly focused on the Authority/Quality of a page and they used PageRank as a measure of that.
However that measure was flawed because the authors may not have been sufficiently focused on User Intent, as evidenced in the Appendix of the Anatomy paper, where the authors cite their number one result for the phrase, Cellular Phone, which was a web page about the dangers of cell phone use while driving. The authors cited the importance of that page as justification for it being the number one result. They were unaware of or willfully ignoring the commercial intent inherent in the search phrase, Cellular Phone.
|...The goals of the advertising business model do not always correspond to providing quality search to users. For example, in our prototype search engine one of the top results for cellular phone is "The Effect of Cellular Phone Use Upon Driver Attention", a study which explains in great detail the distractions and risk associated with conversing on a cell phone while driving. This search result came up first because of its high importance as judged by the PageRank algorithm, an approximation of citation importance on |
Do you see how Google's founders equated the PageRank algorithm with the importance of a web page? But the importance of a web page is just one part now, one door of many that have to be crossed in order to reach the top of the SERPs. As pointed out by another member, a low PageRank web page can outrank web pages of higher rank. I will add to that and say lower PageRank links, that are linked in a specific way to maximize relevance can and do push a site to the top of the SERPs. There is a whole lot more going on beyond the PageRank of a site, including additional signals of importance (which is how I see Panda).
Nevertheless this is an interesting window in what PageRank represented (an indicator of importance), and how it was not the only spice in the recipe (because they were already experimenting with additional signals).
[edited by: martinibuster at 7:31 pm (utc) on Nov 4, 2011]
| 7:27 pm on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Here's another factor. Google has modified the actual math for PR many times and those changes are not communicated in detail. One clear example is that PageRank started with a "random" surfer model, but has evolved into an "intelligent" surfer model.
In other words, when it comes to PR calculation, all links are not weighted equally these days - although in the original paper they were.
| 7:41 pm on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Intelligent surfer, good one. The original paper is a good read, if you haven't read it you should take a few minutes to do so. It's good background information.
Here's an interesting sentence from the paper:
|PageRank can be thought of as a model of user behavior. |
Wrap your head around that. :)