| 6:03 am on May 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I found it contrary to popular belief that the PR of inbound links works well. One site that I have been watching was PR4 with virtually no links except from a PR4 and a PR1 site, while another site that has been PR4 since PR came into the equation cannot be nudged to PR5 regardless of the untold PR5+ links it has accrued since.
| 6:37 am on May 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|We need a google friendly way. Any advice ? |
The only really Google friendly way is simply writing compelling content and not trying to get into any linking schemes.
I've never gone out doing what you would call link building ever, I know how but don't need to do it, and I have had sites get as high as a PR 8 just from natural links. One site recently launched just a couple of months ago is already a PR 4 because people liked it, +1 it, linked it, blogged it, tweeted it, Stumbled upon it, etc. and it rose quickly. If your site isn't rising, it's not because your link building is failing, it's because your site building is failing. It's a simple matter of either it's useful and compelling and natural links happen or it's not. If people really like it, you'll get PR, and if they don't, you won't.
Trying to game the system swapping links from unrelated sites to your topic used to work. Today, not so much IMO as the search engines are catching on to what sites participate in those schemes and most likely discount those links so all that hard work getting them is for squat. If you are lucky to get them, the next Panda update could wipe it all away anyway.
Not that getting links are bad, but you need relevant links.
If you can't get links from your peers, it probably won't be worth your time unless dumb luck prevails.
| 7:32 am on May 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|We need a google friendly way... |
When discussing link building, the goal is to increase relevant traffic to a site, not raising PR. Raising PR is not a useful goal. Increasing relevant traffic that converts (however you define conversion) is what matters.
The purest form of google friendly promotion is to get your site in front of those who are likely to link to it or recommend it in a social manner. That is the essence of google friendly link building.
[edited by: martinibuster at 5:14 pm (utc) on May 20, 2012]
| 5:11 pm on May 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|I found it contrary to popular belief that the PR of inbound links works well. One site that I have been watching was PR4 with virtually no links except from a PR4 and a PR1 site, while another site that has been PR4 since PR came into the equation cannot be nudged to PR5 regardless of the untold PR5+ links it has accrued since. |
Huh? Contrary to popular belief?
The PageRank Citation Ranking [ilpubs.stanford.edu]
The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Search Engine [infolab.stanford.edu]
Topic-Sensitive PageRank: A Context-Sensitive Ranking Algorithm for Web Search [ilpubs.stanford.edu]
Now, PageRank has changed a bit over the years and its importance in the ranking algorithm has (probably?) been diminished, but it still is -- and has always been -- all about links.
| 5:27 pm on May 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Yes that is popular belief, but I haven't seen evidence of it.
The site I was talking about was PR4 with about 30,000 quality links and now has about 54,000 quality backlinks that include a lot more higher PR links. No change in status. For while that site had as many as 500,000 backlinks. No change in status.
Anyways, how does one create a box with a selection of a message like the one above?
| 10:55 am on May 21, 2012 (gmt 0)|
You only see PR as an integer. For all you know it could have gone up from 4.00001 to 4.99999
I am with Martinbuster on the relevance of PR. I used to run a small niche site, the PR was low but we were number one for all key search arguements.
| 10:46 pm on May 21, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|30,000 quality links and now has about 54,000 quality backlinks |
That's not quality, that's quantity.
Probably all crap.
| 1:17 am on May 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|For while that site had as many as 500,000 backlinks. No change in status. |
You're lucky about the no change in status. Many sites with such backlinks have gotten WMT messages about the links and have had to figure out ways to remove them...
Cleaning your backlinks - ideas and suggestions
| 1:49 am on May 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
why you need PR 5? I have a website with PR 3 that ranks at first page for 1 word high competitive keyword (200.000.000 results) it has only a couple of backlinks but is old and has a tone of unique content.
| 3:49 am on May 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I can't help you out with the link building, but...
|Anyways, how does one create a box with a selection of a message like the one above? |
Click the Preview button (instead of submit) and that will take you into advanced mode, where you can select the text and click the gray quote button above the text field.
Took me a while to figure that one out, too. Most sites would say something like "Advanced Mode" or something like that.
| 6:15 am on May 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
From our research PR counts for a lot. For example why are info site pages with much less relevance (with one simple question and answer) put ahead of pages dedicated to the subject that have also been the authority on the subject for more than a decade?
| 6:22 am on May 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|That's not quality, that's quantity. |
No. They are mostly product listings and software reviews on sites like Tucows and CNet. Maybe that's the problem... too many GOOD links.
When the backlinks count hit 500,000 we were both surprised and suspicious. But after after about 2-3 weeks they dropped. We suspect that it was either glitch in Google's formula or that a site/s had run some promotional ads as affiliates and then dropped them. Who knows.
| 3:07 am on Jun 9, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I think at the end our purpose is gain the number 1 in SERP, so that we should concentrate on content ( must be updated and being useful with readers that attract them to be back our site again, then they introduce to others...
| 10:16 pm on Jun 9, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Sometimes, being #2 is better than being at #1