So Page Rank affects ranking in SERPS?

Iknow...I know - but Matt Cutts said so!

[sandpetra]

"Bear in mind that rankings do change all the time, especially for bloggy items. One common reason is when multiple people blog about something, it’s often on the front page of their blogs, and front pages typically have the highest PageRank. As stories scroll off the front page of peoples’ blogs, there’s often a dip in ranking because the links tend to be from deeper pages with lower PageRank."

Matt Cutts Blog - July 30, 2006

Well? I thought there was a censensus (by some at least) that PR did not affect PR?

[Komodo_Tale]

PageRank is Dead - Long Live PageRank

IMOHO you have to separate the GoogleSpeak from RealSpeak. It is probably easier and safer (and perhaps policy) for Googleheads to refer to PageRank in a generic sense than to address specific parts of their algorithms. It is almost assuredly part of the company's historical culture too.

Technically speaking, PageRank is a general level of strength based on the quantity and strength of inbound links to a page. In its original (and publicly understood) configuration it has nothing to do with content or themes or relevancy.

Google has stated that makes use of more than 200 ranking factors.

200+ ranking factors minus all factors of language based relevancy equals PageRank

X - Y = Z

If Z equals all ranking factors and Y represents all language based relevancy factors….well, most likely that still leaves a lot of influence to X, to PageRank.

As Google's algorithms evolve, as they become more and more complex, they trend toward a greater percentage of language based relevancy factors. Hence, PageRank's influence becomes diminished.

Of course, diminished influence does not equate to zero influence. So PageRank still holds value.

This leads to the question, why is PageRank scorned by the search engine optimization community? Partially because we desire lasting results, and if the trend is toward language based relevancy then so should be our work. Partially because we dislike link solicitation; on-page optimization is far more accessible. Mostly because our clients want simple answers to their ranking questions and referring people to PageRank does not satisfy their inquiries, it creates additional questions. We want to give answers that encompass the whole ranking equation.

This is not a good thing.

As an industry, search engine optimizers need to re-embrace PageRank. Why? Because it does trigger our clients to ask questions. If it takes a full minute to answer each question in response to PageRank and you charge $250 an hour then every question is worth $4.17. The more confusion the more questions. The more questions that your clients ask the more money you can make.

So you see, PageRank really is the search engine optimization consultant's faithful friend. Now doesn't that just make you want to scratch that ole PageRank behind the ear?

[georgeek]

I look at it this way, when Matt Cutts or any of the other Google engineers use the word pagerank (PR) they are using it in the sense that Brin and Page used it in their original paper. When SEOs and webmasters use the term pagerank they are usually talking about the green pixels in the Google toolbar (TPR).

The relationship between PR and TPR, if there is one, is unknown and chasing the TPR dragon is a complete waste of time. But Matt's comment in terms of PR makes perfect sense.

[Quadrille]

Well? I thought there was a censensus (by some at least) that PR did not affect PR?

Only among Google-bashers. GPR was created to assist in rankings; specifically, the 'linking' aspects. That has never been in doubt amomg the SEO community.

But georgeek's point is spot on; there's been a tidal wave of people confusing GPR (Google Page Rank) with TBPR (a little green bar that says virtually nothing about your site's GPR several months ago).

GPR doesn't get talked about much, because no-one knows their GPR. And most folk get bored talking about the size of a little green bar. Once you've said "mine is bigger than yours", and they've said "lol", the conversation tends to slow down a bit.

[doc_z]

One can prove that PR (not TPR) is still a factor in ranking, i.e. if all other factors are the same pages are ordered by PR (as the last years).

[webdude]

I've always looked at PR (page rank) in literal terms. I am not talking about the green bar, to me that means nothing because I have sites ranked #1 #2 #3 etc. that have a green bar of 1 or 2. So I see no relation between the two.

But literally, PR (page rank) means exactly that... Page Rank. Search a term and your site pops up at #1, your page rank is #1 - that is where your page ranks for that specific term.

[300m]

I have a question. Cant you see your GPR in the Google Directory? I always thought that was not the same as TBPR? Yes, No?
(If it is in the directory anyway.)

[tedster]

One thing you can be sure of. If you hear a Google employee mention PageRank, they will always have a specific technical meaning -- the one that grew from the famous paper that Brin and Page first wrote. The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine [www-db.stanford.edu]

It's really important not to muddy the waters by using the term PageRank casually to mean "where does the page rank on a certains earch query".

This technically precise PageRank is one of many, many factors (some say over 200) that Google now uses to calculate positions on any SERP. Yes, it still really does matter, but it's certainly not the be-all that it once was.

It's also important (as was mentioned above) to note that Google is continually updating your "real" PageRank behind the scenes for use in calculating the SERPs, even though they only change what the toolbar reports about 4 times a year.

[Komodo_Tale]

We have long speculated that PR was updated internally more frequently than the green bar but I think this is the first time that a Google employee has publicly stated that PageRank is updated continuously and on the fly. Does that seem to track right?

Have you scratched your PageRank behind the ear today?

[Quadrille]

It sounds sensible to me; we know the serps are 'on the fly', so why would GPR be nailed down?

The implication of this, of course, is that the little green bar has even less value, being a record of a variable at one random moment.

No surprises there, then :)

[doc_z]

We have long speculated that PR was updated internally more frequently than the green bar but I think this is the first time that a Google employee has publicly stated that PageRank is updated continuously and on the fly.

GoogleGuy already said this a year ago [webmasterworld.com]: "... we typically show new backlink sample sets every 3-5 weeks or so. We have a bank of machines that computes pagerank continuously (and continually, I suppose; I wasn't an English major), but we only export new visible pageranks every 3-4 months or so. "

[zampik]

Is there any certain time interval where the GPR gets updated? Anyone has any idea about how often should we checking our SERP rankings for certain keywords?

[Komodo_Tale]

Yes, I do recall that now. Thank you. My question back then was whether it was a rotating computation (A to Z then back again) or accross the board. Now we know it is across the board.

[sudden]

I think we are all used to work with web site having at least a basic level of pagerank, PR4 or something like that.

But you really learn how important pagerank is, when you don´t have any. One of our new clients started with zero pagerank - just waiting for Googlebot can drive you mad in this situation. It took two full months to get his 60 pages indexed...

[MrSpeed]

But you really learn how important pagerank is, when you don´t have any.

Amen to that!

[Halfdeck]

What was interesting, to me at least, was hearing Matt Cutts credit PageRank as the main reason .gov, .org, and .edu sites rank so well. All else being equal, it seems there's no difference betwen a PR 3 .gov and PR 3 .biz.