Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: open
All I read is "will this increase it?"
"will this affect it?"
"what PR is good/bad?"
Has anyone stopped to think about WHY they are chasing PR?
Why is this chase going on? I don't understand.
I have been looking long and hard at PR and its effects on search engine results and I can see absolutely no relationship between a pages PR and its location in a search engine. I have seen PR1 pages coming way before PR7's, I have even seen grey bars outgunning much higher PR's.
So if there are no links between PR and the results Google gives then what's the point in chasing something that has no meaning?
Please don't take this as a flame, it's not intended that way, it's just that I have never seen this question asked or answered. Woouldn't it be a gas if PR is nothing more than a PR exercise and actually doesn't have any meaning at all!
joined:July 19, 2001
Might want to do some reading here: [webmasterworld.com...]
Besides that, higher pagerank leads to sites being crawled regularly. That alone is a significant benefit to sites that aren't totally static.
<I have been looking long and hard at PR and its effects on search engine results and I can see absolutely no relationship between a pages PR and its location in a search engine. I have seen PR1 pages coming way before PR7's, I have even seen grey bars outgunning much higher PR's.>
This simply means that it's not the only factor in SERPs. Since there are dozens of other factors involved in ranking, it's difficult to compare one page with a particular PR and its position versus another page with a higher or lower PR and its position and try to determine how much impact PR has on this particular ranking.
The only way to do this would be to notice how a particular page ranks, and then again how that same page ranks when the PR has either increased or decreased, then find how much of an increase or decrease of ranking correlated with a change in PR. And even this would be inaccurate, because it assumes that all competing pages were static throughout the experiment.
Page Position = Page Relevancy * Page Importance
Page relevancy is based on the page content and link anchor text. The page importance is based on pagerank.
So looking at the results you'll see pages with high and low PR depending on their relevance to the search. However, the higher your PR the better your position in the search engine rankings.
I have noticed what yoou have noticed too, but also noticed that if you go to the homepage of the site, you will find a much higher PR, which is why I posted this:
Wondering if there is such a thing as 'local rank' or 'site rank' which may influence things?
To my mind it appears that no-one can really justify why PR should be considered to be important except by virtue of the fact that other PR hunters would show an interest, which was my initial suspicion.
It seems the PR doesn't have a bearing on your results in a search and therefore become an exercise in futility for those trying to gain a higher PR.
From the tests I have carried out it appears that the only thing that matters is the content of the page and its relationship to the search being done. A classic example of this is how a search can turn up a page from my own forum which carries a meager PR2 and with a single mention of "Red Foo" and yet there are whole pages with higher PR dedicated to "Red Foo" which do not manage anything like the placement in the search.
I really do feel that PR is nothing more than a white rabbit which was used to help market Google into the position of #1 engine.
Considering the amount of discussion that took place when this mystical PR system first came out and since, it is any wonder that there are so many people chasing the rabbit, not knowing how it's calculated or even what bearing it has on results.
Google must be laughing all the way back to the magicians hat.
Ultimately, is there that much differnce between results on Google compared to say ATW? And if so, would anyone say that Googles results are that much more relevant than any other SE?
Thanks again to you all for your thoughts on this. I appreciate you all taking the time.
I mean if you have a site that's got 100 inbound text links out there which say "widgets" then your site is going to rank quite high for widgets.
However, in the old days Google did not really spider affiliate links especially if there was some kind of cgi in the link. But now it does spider much more complex hyperlinks which are not re-directing, but contain cgi code.
I predict that this will KILL a lot of business which relies on affiliate funds to run their sites. Let me provide an example of what I mean. If a sponsor site has 10 sponsors all linking with cgi/click codes into it, as Google stands now, it will credit the cgi-resulting page as a backward link. This pushes out the affiliates from promoting the products of the sponsor programme and the sponsor ends up dominating the serps. So the 10 sites that were funded by that sponsor will have to either close down or try to make money some other way. They are without the PR that the sponsor now has because of the links in.
Now before you all jump in and tell me that affiliates are just leeches, these leeches are providing useful content to surfers, and a successful free content website has traffic which costs bandwidth, which needs to be paid for somehow and sponsorship is the best way of doing this, otherwise the content which is free to the public has to be placed on the other side of a payment system, which creates another sponsor.
Can you see how this senario is going around in circles - like the chicken and the egg :-
1> sponsor gets linked
2> sponsor gets on serps
3> affiliates lose ranking
4> affilates close down
5> surfers cannot find free info
6> surfers use another search engine
Please Google, your Googlebot has gone too far this time.
If a sponsor site has 10 sponsors all linking with cgi/click codes into it, as Google stands now, it will credit the cgi-resulting page as a backward link. This pushes out the affiliates from promoting the products of the sponsor programme and the sponsor ends up dominating the serps.
Wouldn't the worst case be that the merchant dominates just the top spot?
Beside many affiates use generic terms when linking to the merchant like 'Buy', 'Buy At Merchant'. You don't see too many keywords in the links to the merchants.
I always thought of incoming link text helping my site, but apparently the linktext on my pages is helping my site to rank well?
Can someone please clarify the difference/importance of imcoming link text (another site pointing to your site)
outgoing link text ( you pointing to another site)
Regarding PR, I will hopefully be able to test the effect of a high pagerank page with very few incoming links and good anchor text vs. a page with medium pagerank and about 10-30 incoming links with good anchor text. I'll keep my fingers crossed and let you know the results by the end of the next monthly (or is it yearly now? hehe) dance...
Outgoing links help you to rank high because it contains the keywords in your page and HAS NOTHING to do with who you link to.
While for inbound links, the anchor text other people put on their site give you the opputunity to rank high with that keyword - even keywords that don't exist in your site.