zeus
msg:4384579 | 9:37 pm on Nov 7, 2011 (gmt 0) |
I noticed some new sites and old have got a new Pagerank, just wanted to let you know [edited by: goodroi at 12:10 am (utc) on Nov 8, 2011]
|
zeus
msg:4384639 | 12:15 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
got a new site 2 month old with PR5 and another PR3 els not much new.
|
netfleet
msg:4384644 | 12:32 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Yes - after 7 years of PR5-ness, my main site hit 6! Another went from 5 to 6 and another from 3 to 5. All looking good to me :)
|
kidder
msg:4384648 | 1:05 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
I will trade my green bar for my traffic thanks...
|
WillG
msg:4384657 | 1:31 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Dont count on PR being correct. Unless they completely changed the metric. A site I watch has been pr 0 since day one no new links to site and its 3 today. A site I built a few months back with a few good links is 3 today as well traffic still nothing to mention bounce rate 60 + % junk traffic and poor rankings even with some well placed high value anchor text links. As Kidder said I will trade for good traffic over the green bar
|
netfleet
msg:4384666 | 2:18 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Of course traffic is what it's all about - however don't rain on my/our parade ;)
Like it or not it's one quantifiable (albeit flaky) measure that one is doing something roughly right in Google's eyes.
Oh got a PR7 too - now that's exciting!
|
DirigoDev
msg:4384678 | 3:46 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Agreed, I'd trade some of my new found PR for some sales. We had to let 8 people go last week. All really good folks. Too bad! This after a recovery of traffic on Panda 2.5.2. PR is worthless. What we need is a stable environment (e.g consistent SERPS not this yoyo junk).
|
kidder
msg:4384693 | 4:10 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Could not agree more, once upon a time search used to be based on relevance... And it worked.
|
cyber49
msg:4384720 | 6:23 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Confirmed.
|
Bewenched
msg:4384725 | 6:41 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
No change for our 14 year old site, love to have our traffic back though.
|
jeyKay
msg:4384726 | 6:45 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
| Could not agree more, once upon a time search used to be based on relevance... And it worked. |
|
I think people tend to use the word "relevance" too loosely at times. What is truly relevant? You might think your (site) the best as what you do, but sometimes outsiders might think differently. Not saying you aren't or are...but its something to think about. If you ask me, Google is getting better at sifting the more quality relevance. But I might regret that statement later :/
|
rannans
msg:4384747 | 8:32 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
retained my PR8 and managed a 10% increase in SE visitors over the last month , so good to see that i'm doin something right
|
AnkitMaheshwari
msg:4384772 | 9:30 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Yup, PR has updated.
|
LewisM
msg:4384778 | 9:57 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Seems to be a good update, nice to see things going forward.
|
Andem
msg:4384800 | 10:55 am on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
PageRank update confirmed here. Overall, the update seems to make more sense than the one before last. Google.com is still PR10 and a few sites I regularly visit increased a bit, and a competitor which buys and spams links has dropped from PR8 to PR2.
|
topstar
msg:4384841 | 12:37 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
PR6 to 5 not good.
|
bakiths2004
msg:4384892 | 2:41 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
My website is a new website, I do not understand why after a night on my PR 3....
|
netmeg
msg:4384913 | 3:33 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
ork ork ork my *contact* page has a PR3, and internal URLs on a client's two week old site have PR2.
I don't think I'd pay too much attention to this one.
|
TinkyWinky
msg:4384924 | 4:03 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
** Yawn ** Sorry it's a vanity thing. Measure success by traffic unless you're selling those links ;)
|
azn romeo 4u
msg:4384934 | 4:32 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
5.1 Million back links and still a PR4. I touched 5, four years ago, and about 1.5 years ago.
|
Joshmc
msg:4384948 | 4:50 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Interesting note on this update. 3 different sites all about 2-3 months old. none link to the other
-one is pr 3 with no links and tons of social shares
-one is pr 3 with only one link and no social shares
-one is pr 3 with many good links and social shares
I would take this with a huge grain of salt to see this kind of effect on the three sites I mentioned above.
|
irock
msg:4384961 | 5:52 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Do you guys see a massive traffic change after the pagerank update?
|
Rlilly
msg:4384979 | 6:38 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
This PR update seems a little more generous than usual. Dont be surprised if is some tweaking in days to follow.
|
netmeg
msg:4384991 | 7:26 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
| Do you guys see a massive traffic change after the pagerank update? |
|
No.
|
frontpage
msg:4385000 | 7:56 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
The only benefit of a higer PR is possibly a higher priority for spidering and freshness in the SERPs?
|
smithaa02
msg:4385051 | 9:38 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Anybody else having miserable luck with bulk pagerank checkers? Individual ones work fine for me, but I've tried a bunch of bulk ones and none of them work...perhaps google implemented some sort of throttle on the pagerank lookup mechanism...
|
netmeg
msg:4385060 | 10:01 pm on Nov 8, 2011 (gmt 0) |
If you have a recent version of FF you might find an extension that will do it. I think Aaron's does. But the older tools probably aren't going to work on much of anything anymore.
|
matrix_jan
msg:4385115 | 1:13 am on Nov 9, 2011 (gmt 0) |
I see google.com having PR9
|
smithaa02
msg:4385132 | 2:06 am on Nov 9, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Curious...they were PR10 a couple of months ago. Actually a number of big sites have been demoted from PR10.
apple.com
google.com
adobe.com
facebook.com
microsoft.com
Government sites and .org PR10 sites seem to have faired ok though... Good riddance to the corporate ones...none of them were that deserving of a PR10. Addthis.com is still PR10 though even though they get their links though gimmickyness :(
|
| This 48 message thread spans 2 pages: 48 ( [1] 2 ) > > |
|
|
