Keyword Rank depends, again on PR

[alfawolf7]

The higher your PR the less words you need to optimize.
- The return to PR as an important factor in KW rank is debated here:

[Sansoft]

I dont think Google PR is again as important as it use to be earlier. There are still many sites that are well ranked with very low PR.

[alfawolf7]

I am not saying that you need a high PR to be well ranked I am saying that what is new is that the HIGHER your PR (7 and higher) the less words you need (etc) to make it into the top ten for a keyword.

[karamkshetra]

I think high PR and 3-4 keywords targeted will get good rankings

[thecityofgold2005]

I dont think Google PR is again as important as it use to be earlier. There are still many sites that are well ranked with very low PR.

You cannot know that because you cannot know what the true PR of any page is. It has been known for years, and acknowledged by Google, that Toolbar PR is at best an approximation and at worst a random number.

[DXL]

I used to believe in PR value, now I don't. At most, PR is something I need to convince other paranoid webmasters that they are getting value from a reciprocal link exchange.

I watched one of my sites drop from PR5-PR2 with no change whatosever in the SERPs.

[MThiessen]

I have a PR 7 site that suffers far less traffic then a PR 5 site I have in relatively the same genre. The PR 7 site actually has more material then the PR 5.

The big difference is the PR 5 site has been around since 1997 the PR 7 site is circa 2003

"Time" is the biggest variable, the older the site (by the same owner I believe) is the strongest ranking factor out there.

I believe this is due to anyone's inablity to fake it or SEO it. You can't fake owning a site for years. You can optimize, get lots of links, write profound articles, but *age* will still be your biggest PLUS in SE rankings.

Buying an old domain does not seem to have the same effect. I bought a site established in the 90s and it lost traffic before I ever changed a thing.

[SEOPTI]

Sansoft, sorry but your statement is nonsense:

"I dont think Google PR is again as important as it use to be earlier. There are still many sites that are well ranked with very low PR. "

I suggest you go back and read some PR threads here on WW. Only Google knows the real PR of a site.

[Sansoft]

DXL , I agree with you . I have experienced the same thing with one of my site where PR dropped but not SERP.

SEOPTI, as you said "Only Google knows the real PR of a site." , i agree with this. What i was talking about was a Page Rank that google toolbar shows and which is, i think, the only way to know the PR of any page, is not as reliable as it use to be. I have seen many web pages that are having no content , only outgoing links that too more than 100 links , still enjoying PR 4 or so.On contrary there are many pages having PR 0 or 1 but having good SERP .

Similiarly i have also came across some pages which are having Google PR 1 but not having cached version of that page .

Seems, Google doesnt show or disclose what it interprets.

[thecityofgold2005]

Where have people been the past few years! Read back on this forum. Toolbar PR is acknowledged by Google as being innacurate and, I for one, have considered it irrelevant for at least 2 years now...

[Robert Charlton]

Here's a recent discussion of Toolbar PR that makes a few points which relate to this discussion....

Toolbar PR. I'm confused?
Is it or Isn't it of any value?
[webmasterworld.com...]