Forum Moderators: open
Is it really unethical to buy PR?
I personally would sell my Grandmother for a PR8 link and have been thinking a lot about the morality of doing so.
I think the real problem people have is that they have worked very hard to get where they are and them someone comes along and buys a better rank.
Money has always and will always be a short cut - those who toil hard to achieve something always have to face that there are people who can wander in and achieve the same thing with a wad of cash - after all at some stage someone worked hard for that money - so maybe money is like a token of hard work already done?
I would appreciate peoples feedback on this - am I just convinving myself that something unethical is right coz it suits me to or is the 'unethical' stamp just sour grapes?
BTW She really is a sweet old lady - comes with a secret recipe and all, any offers? :)
No sorry, I think you are missing my point.
PR is a result of inbound links.
PR does not determine or majorly influence my ranking.
It is merely an indicator of the amount of inbound links I have.
Level of PR influencing ranking is a different issue to PR vs no PR. They mean very different things.
Yes, if i had no PR my traffic would drop substantially. But that is because my site is not being indexed, and not due to a low PR.
What I am saying is that a sites level of PR is irrelevant to your ranking (or largely irrelevant - I will concede that Google may still factor PR into the algo in a small way, but not as such as it will make a noticable difference).
There are many other factors to taken into account for your sites ranking. Why pay more for a link than you spend on developing your site?
>You do well with a PR of 5.
No - I do well anyway. PR5 is a result of my inbound links.
Scott
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement:
If your website was given a PR of 0, you would drop in the serps.
If you don't agree, please tell me why.
It has been answered.
If you are advocating selling PR, which it appears you are, it is unethical.
However, as others have noted, it may not get you penalized.
In short. It's about intent and your, or your clients, ethical code.
If so, then I would expect my site would dissapear from the SERPs.
But this is a totally different issue from buying high PR links. Did you even read my last post?
Any PR (other than PR0) is merely an indicator of inbound links.
At best it is a minimal factor in the ranking algo - im thinking less than 5% - at best.
Also, if PR does affect your ranking, then it's your own PR, not inbound PR.
Yes, inbound PR directly affects your own PR. But a single link, regardless of the PR only contributes a small part to your sites PR.
Therefore buying a high PR link in order to increase your ranking then:
1. You are only contributing a small part to your own PR.
2. Your own PR is only contributing a small part to your ranking (if at all).
Therefore any impact the additional PR would be negligable.
What is more likely, is that people who pay stupid sums of money just for PR, are also paying relative sums of money for other sources of traffic, marketing and SEO.
The accumulative effect is a noticable rise in the SERPs, traffic and income.
Scott
<added> Hehe i just got an email from someone asking for a reciprocal link .... he mentions the ranking benefit a link from his PR6 will give me... :) </added>
> At best it is a minimal factor in the ranking algo - im thinking less than 5% - at best.
I would disagreee - as I see from my field the results for widgets are next:
1) PR6
2) PR6
3) PR6
4) PR4
5) PR6
6) PR6
7) PR5
8) PR6
9) PR4
10) PR5
11) PR4
12) PR5
13) PR5
...
so as you see no PR3 amoung the first ... and the PR is the most influence factor (I believe about 30% - 50%), if consider with inbound links anchor and title: 80% - 90%.
Of course yahoo homepage on my search will be 1.000.000 if it will appear at all with it's PR9, if you mean this.
PR0 does not mean you are banned.
This is exactly the same issue as buying PR links.
>Any PR (other than PR0) is merely an indicator of inbound links. <
I would add to this that it is also a factor in determing your ranking in the serps.
>At best it is a minimal factor in the ranking algo - im thinking less than 5% - at best. <
If this is true, then why does a couple of drops in PR kick you so far down in the serps?
>Also, if PR does affect your ranking, then it's your own PR, not inbound PR.<
It's my understanding that inbound links are how PR for a given site is calculated. In fact you can't have PR without inbound links.
>Yes, inbound PR directly affects your own PR. But a single link, regardless of the PR only contributes a small part to your sites PR.<
This is purely dependent on your current links. A site that has three BL's and a PR of 2 would see a huge increase in a single PR8 or PR9 link, if Google allowed the PR pass.
>Therefore buying a high PR link in order to increase your ranking then:
1. You are only contributing a small part to your own PR.
2. Your own PR is only contributing a small part to your ranking (if at all).<
Again, this depends on the site. However, you will always see some increase.
>Therefore any impact the additional PR would be negligable.<
I disagree with this statement on a macro level.
The facts are simple. PR is measurable and directly impacts serps, traffic and profit.
Since this is the case, both buying PR and Selling links for the express purpose of passing PR is unethical.
Im going home from work in 40 minutes, and rarely contribute to long threads if it means me reading lots the next morning! :) So I probably wont post back to this thread tommorow.
adsoft13:
Personally I think that's circumstantial evidence. How many sites were in that search? I think looking at the top 10 is a poor sample.
Yes, I would agree that there would be a trend that would show higher PR sites near the top and lower PR sites at the bottom. But that does not necessarily mean that PR is sending those sites to the top.
If PR were a deciding factor, the number 4 on the list wouldnt be PR4 and number 5 wouldnt be PR6.
My point (again) is that PR is merely a meter for inbound links and not a deciding factor in ranking.
c1bernaught:
OK, I can see your point and where your coming from.
A major shift in PR would affect your rankings.
But it is not the PR that causes this.
If I were to be bumped to PR0, and dropped low in the SERPs it cannot be concluded that the PR change caused this.
Clearly if such a dramatic change in my PR occured, there must have been another reason. PR doesnt not change of its own accord.
Example:
If I did something to make it unindexable by google - my PR would be gone and I would be out of the index.
Now what caused me to drop out of the index? PR or my actions?
Obviously my actions - the change in PR was merely a result of this.
That's an extreme example.
My point is that PR is just the gloss. It's the after effect. The result. The indicator.
It is not the cause or the factor (OK, not a major one anyway).
Ultimately, IMHO anyway, there are too many other factors affecting ranking to justify paying for a high PR link.
There's little quantifible evidence to even suggest it makes a difference and there's plenty of evidence to show that it is not needed.
Scott :)
PS, sorry if this post doesnt make sense - posting on other forums at the same time! :)
First of all, for every one of you who claim buying and selling lnks for the purpose of inflating PR is unethical, yet, you have even a single link on any of your pages because someone else offered to put your link up if you put up one of theirs, you sir, are a hypocrite. Cash is not the only thing that defines a sale. Anything of value being traded is a sale!
Secondly, the only reason this is even a question is because Google doesn't like it. Before we all jump on the I'm a good guy and you're a bad guy wagon, let me propose that before we demand a definiton of our ethics, we should demand it of Google too. Just yesterday Google got busted over their so-called news service by the Register. Is putting press releases mixed in with news and calling it news ethical?
If you feel something has value to your business, it is not a question of ethcis, it is a question of capital investment. If buying a link to increase your income is unethical, so is buying a sign for your store. So is buying business cards, so is buying anything that is legal and has the potential of increasing your bottom line. If Google doesn't like it, that means there is a risk to your investment. It does not mean the person buying or selling links for any purpose is ethical or not. Is a rapist who never bought a link ethical? Is a preacher who pays for ads unethical? I propose that spamming me with a "let's trade links" email is much, much more unethical than offering to pay me for my link. Do you boys even understand the defintion of ethics?
Now, I'd love to hear some of you hard working webmasters who send those stupid emails asking for a link, to justify how they see themsleves as ethical because they would never buy a link for PR.
Finally, if you believe a link has profit potential to your business, regardless of who or what created that potential, but you say you would never pay for that something, then I'd love to hear how you justify calling yourself an internet marketer.
does that little piece of spam crap look ethical to you?
Just kidding (dont hurt me please!) :)
I agree with parts of what you're saying, disagree with others and don't know about some.
I don't have much time to address it all but there is a couple of points Id like to touch on.
Firstly, you're making a lot of assumtpions about the rest of us and frankly sex has nothing to do with SEO. Leave it at the door please.
>Finally, if you believe a link has profit potential to your business, regardless of who or what created that potential, but you say you would never pay for that something, then I'd love to hear how you justify calling yourself an internet marketer.
I was offered advertising space on the Harvard students site (or something related - cant really remember). It would have been great traffic for my site.
But because I run a non profit information site, I cant afford advertising.
Plus "I will never pay for advertising" - because I dont need to - I can get the results without paying for them.
Tell me now - does that make me less of an Internet Marketer? :)
Scott
If buying a link to increase your income is unethical, so is buying a sign for your store. So is buying business cards, so is buying anything that is legal and has the potential of increasing your bottom line.
Right on Shurlee.
May I add buying a spot for $299 on Yahoo should be considered unethical then too. For some reason, most that argue selling PR is unethical often overlook this fact.
:)
Plus "I will never pay for advertising" - because I dont need to - I can get the results without paying for them.
Tell me now - does that make me less of an Internet Marketer? :) <
I really wish you hadn't asked me that question. Ever hear that when a man gives his opinion he is being assertive but when a woman does the same she is being a bitch?
OK, just remember, you asked.
In my opinion a person running a non-profit site, calling himself Marketing Guy who brags that he would never pay for an ad, could not be less of an internet marketer. Wait, wait, I'm not through.
Furthermore, you mentioned in a thread about ethics, (you had posted to a about a dozen times by the way), how you could not spend much more time in the thread because you would be leaving WORK soon. I wonder how ethical your employer thinks that is?
So, does all that stuff you mentioned make you less of an internet marketer? I would have to say no. What it makes is, it makes me feel a little foolish for reading several of your posts in the past and taking them seriously.
It seems that many people who post on this site have a somewhat unrealistic approach to marketing ... they almost seem like they are doing SEO as a hobby. Do you think that succesful businesses spend much time worrying about playing fair and whether or not what they do is ethical? The truth is they do whatever they legally can to maximize profits.
You must be a women as only women seem to be able to expouse on the faults of men when they themselves are not faultless.
>First of all, for every one of you who claim buying and selling lnks for the purpose of inflating PR is unethical, yet, you have even a single link on any of your pages because someone else offered to put your link up if you put up one of theirs, you sir, are a hypocrite. Cash is not the only thing that defines a sale. Anything of value being traded is a sale!<
I would simply add the word "intent" to your rant. Many people exchange links for the purpose of driving traffic from a site with synnergy. I good link can net serious traffic.
>Secondly, the only reason this is even a question is because Google doesn't like it. Before we all jump on the I'm a good guy and you're a bad guy wagon, let me propose that before we demand a definiton of our ethics, we should demand it of Google too. Just yesterday Google got busted over their so-called news service by the Register. Is putting press releases mixed in with news and calling it news ethical?<
I don't believe there is a good guy/bad guy band wagon. We are simply discussing the purchase of PR, which is supposed to be a measure of how popular a site is. Buying PR simply artificially inflates this. Google's TOS applies noth thier ethics. Unless you are saying that it's ok to be unethical because Google appears to be.
>If you feel something has value to your business, it is not a question of ethcis, it is a question of capital investment. If buying a link to increase your income is unethical, so is buying a sign for your store. So is buying business cards, so is buying anything that is legal and has the potential of increasing your bottom line. If Google doesn't like it, that means there is a risk to your investment. It does not mean the person buying or selling links for any purpose is ethical or not. Is a rapist who never bought a link ethical? Is a preacher who pays for ads unethical? I propose that spamming me with a "let's trade links" email is much, much more unethical than offering to pay me for my link. Do you boys even understand the defintion of ethics?<
The difference here is quite evident. Buying a sign gaurantees nothing. Buying PR gaurantees results. Also, your word "legal", I'll take that to mean "within the rules". Buying PR is a way to artificially increase your sites own PR and is against Google's TOS. It is in essence "illegal" and being so, is unethical.
>Now, I'd love to hear some of you hard working webmasters who send those stupid emails asking for a link, to justify how they see themsleves as ethical because they would never buy a link for PR.<
Ok, I have a site selling donuts, you have a site selling milk. I think my donut buyers would like to have some milk.
I ask for link because I think a certain # of milk drinkers will want donuts. You want a link because you think a certain # of donut eaters want milk. Pretty simple.
>Finally, if you believe a link has profit potential to your business, regardless of who or what created that potential, but you say you would never pay for that something, then I'd love to hear how you justify calling yourself an internet marketer.<
I think turning in spam reports on my competitors, just to cause them trouble, may be of benefit and has potential as well, but I wouldn't do that either.
How much so you spend buying PR? I'd be willing to bet it's a great deal of money. How's that working out?
Can you say "underground"?
Organized crime is just a business too. They are just very good marketers who take advantage their strenth's. Maybe everyone else just has an unrealistic approach to business?
Ethics is a personal choice.
You ever heard this one... "Two wrongs don't make a right?"
Note that my post read "do whatever they legally can to maximize profits." By definition, organized crime is illegal. You are confusing ethics & legality.
Being an aggressive marketer doesn't make you unethical.
Buying PR gaurantees results.
Wrong. Buying PR doesn't gaurantee anything. Like I said before, I see plenty of sites with higher PR than mine, and I rank much higher in the serps then they do.
There is a difference between selling a link from a high PR page, and promising that that link will bring results. Selling PR is a promise that the PR will actually be passed, and that it is in the controll of the seller.
Selling a advertising link is not unethical. I also consider it ethical for google to block the PR from these links if they consider it necessary, or for someone to complain to Google if they think it is adversly affecting the results.
Jeez, yet another inane analogy! Ok, how's this for something PRETTY SIMPLE?
You sell donuts right? And you thnk your customers might like to buy some milk right? Here's an idea.
SELL SOME MILK YA GOOFBALL! Pretty simple.
Join my milk affiliate program, stock up on some milk for yourself but if you want me to sell your donuts to my milk customers, keep your stupid link and pay me! Unless of course there is something in it for me, but then I guess that would make two wrongs or some such silliness.
As for how much I spend on PR, it is absolutely none of your business and I find a question like that lacking in ethcics. I will admit that it is substantial but only to illustrate the point that my clients expect results. Not some lame excuses about how it is taking months because only one person repsonded to my 300 silly spam emails begging for links. My clients want a return on their investment. I give it to them to the best of my ability and I simply don't appreciate the implication that my investing my money the way I think best serves my clients makes me less ethical than some donut salesman begging for a free link.
Unfortunately, most equate buying a link advertisement to buying PR which is unfair.
OK shurley - thats a fair point.
I actually run 10 sites at the minute.
My own 3 are all non profit - the one i was refering to in the thread is my main site - it's my passion if you will - i dedicate a lot of time to developing it (career advice). Of the other 2, one was my first site, which I use to test techniques on and the other is fairly neglected right now.
2 of the other sites I run are for friends and family. One for the charity my mum works for and the other for a friend just starting his own business (recruitment agency).
At work I run 5 sites with several more on the way. These are real estate sites and the work I do brings in monthly sales of over 1 million euros - with NO paid for web advertising.
I have a degree in Marketing, and although I have only worked in this field for a year, I have out - SEO'd a lot of my competitors who inlcude - multinationals with huge IT departments - large companies who hire SEO firms - companies with very talented individuals.
My currently employer is happy enough with the results im producing to allow me as much time as I require at work to dedicate to my own sites.
My nick was chosen quickly based on my background - which also enables me to comment intelligently on the subjects on these forums.
Im willing to accept that im wrong and there are others that know more than I do - Im only passing on my opinion on this.
You can take what I say as you will - im not here to educate you - Im just having my say like the others here.
Back on topic:
I would say that Shurlee is perhaps taking the term ethics a little to seriously.
I believe the original post was specifically refering to whether buying PR is right or wrong - not an indepth reference to the morality of life.
To this I would say - each to their own.
Scott :)
This isn't about ethics at all, is it?
This is about the fact that some people on this planet think everything is for sale at the right price and everything can be bought and sold.
While others on this planet think that some things are not and should never be for sale.
Think of PR as Google's record of the love that spreads around the web.
You can pay for Google love, just like you can pay for love in the real world. Or, if you don't think that's right then you can choose not to buy it.
However those people who think that paying for Google-love is unnatural and immoral are unlikely to convince those who see it as a regular commodity purchase... and those who think that pimping their site's PR is a sound business practice will likewise never be convinced to stop.
So... let's all get along, shall we?
1) PR6
2) PR6
3) PR6
4) PR4
5) PR6
6) PR6
7) PR5
8) PR6
9) PR4
10) PR5
11) PR4
12) PR5
13) PR5
...
so as you see no PR3 amoung the first ... and the PR is the most influence factor (I believe about 30% - 50%), if consider with inbound links anchor and title: 80% - 90%.
----------
A comment about the above as to how "important" PR is. PR4 and PR5 are trivial accomplishments. I have a couple piddly amateur sites, one a PR6 and the other a PR5. I've routinely seen the home page's of teenagers with PR4 and PR5. Seriously, many business sites could get up to PR4 or PR5 quite often if the owner just asked his cousin Kim for a link to his site from her home page. Assuming that the in the above SERP "widgets" is a reasonably competitive search term, the fact that in the above sample SERP a PR4 site was able to make it to the #4 position calls into the question the importance of PR.
Nope...
Roundabout,
Legal simply means within a set of governing rules. Google's TOS is Google's law. Artificially inflating PR is not "legal".
Judgjefferies,
What we do as people is morality. Choosing to to something, against stated rules, may or may not be moral.
It is certainly unethical. Unless you have no ethics.
Bio4ce,
There is always a consequence to buying PR. That's why it is bought.
BigDave,
I agree. Buying links to drive traffic is an ethical practice, unless the intent is to pass PR.
Shurlee,
YA SPAZ, why not just blow away the whole linking thing? You obviously have no idea how to use it to drive traffic. It must be wrong, as you are the expert, right? I mean why link? Just build a site that sells everything.
You're funny......
At least you admit your bias. I can respect that. I have to say that explains your staunch defense. Hey, justify it any way you want. You're making money right? What do you care?
You make money for your clients, good for you. It seems that you would do anything to make sure that happens. The ends justify the means, right?
Whoooooo haaaaaaa...... Bring it!
Also, the fact that higher PR doesn't equate to higher serps has been pointed out many times before on this forum. You can continue to believe that it does though. You are entitled to that opinion.
Continuing this thread is like watching a tire spin in mud. Take care everyone.
Cheers.
