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? :)
How old is that PR0 page and does it get hit by freshbot?
My experience is quite a bit different. Pages that do not change, with only internal links that do not change, but have more PR passed down from the home page move up in the ranks. Comparing different pages with different incoming links and different content just tells you that there is more involved that just pagerank.
Pagerank is not everything, but it does count. Ignore it at your won risk.
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.
----
ROFL! :)
I realise this may be hard for you to understand, but not all of us have sites on the web to bleed money out of people.
Some of us just want to provide information for our users.
We do that by exchanging links. This way each site exchanges traffic. Inbound linking and the text used (note - not PR - PR is just a result of this) helps sites ranking. More people can find our information.
Quite frankly if you need to pay for high PR links then you dont have the quality of site that high PR sites would link to.
Buying your way into the SERP's is the Internet Marketing equivalent of Telemarketing. You can say you work in marketing, but that's really all you got.
By all means do whatever it takes to get results for your clients and sleep well at night.
But when Google changes its algo or someone just like you gets one step ahead, making all your hard work obsolete - dont come crying.
You can buy quantity, but it can be taken away from you just as quickly.
Quality lasts and in the long run is miles better than any quick fix.
>Continuing this thread is like watching a tire spin in mud. Take care everyone.
Yep! :) But it's fun! C'mon admit it! ;)
Scott
It doesn't come in and out like you would with freshbot.
The real irony of the whole thing is that it is a site that I wouldn't consider to be very well optimized. At least not compared to other sites that I have.
Good title, <h1> tags, and content targeting my keywords is all that it has.
:)
If your site was online just before the last deepcrawl odd's are you have some PR. Since it isn't officially in the index, you don't see the PR.
When the update occurs, you will either see some PR, probably a PR3 or you will be gone.
Good luck.
BTW: This thread was started to burn time before the update.
My experience:-
I have a brand spanking new site, just deep crawled today (quite a lot of good quality links of PR4 and PR5 coming in), so I guess I'm going to come out something around a PR4 (this is a good content site) next shake up of google.
Your experience:-
I assume (I have read this whole thread and others) from the way that you guys talk that PR is important to keeping alive, more than it is about the serps?
We are currently No. 4 and No. 5 in google for the main keyword combination searches that I'm targeting.
We currently have no *displayed* page rank (grey bar).
We're getting a lot of visits (for our sector).
So, am I right in assuming that we have been "judged" by freshbot purely on content hence our good rating but that if we did not have that PR, from those incoming links, we would be dead in a couple of months?
This is a purely non-commercial site by the way, but I have also done a few semi-commercial (dipping toe in water kind of businesses) so I'm interested.
Thanks,
D
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.
Until they get a PR0 penalty and their whining begins. :-)
That said --I'd never buy PR, there's too many things that can go wrong.
I'd sell it in a heartbeat , but PR4 aint worth much :(
Gee, a person that can be sarcastic! How refreshing.
Hmmm... I wonder why the posts here are about PR? Oh yeah, the topic was about ethics and PR. Go figure....
Oh yeah...., it's currency exchange for something that is not only not yours to sell, but that causes an artificial increase in PR.... Oh, Man! That is some funny stuff.
It's just unethical. Oh, but it's big of you to want to sell and not buy.
Ha, ha, ha.....
I mentioned forum (forum and thread two different things)
Oh yeah...., it's currency exchange for something that is not only not yours to sell, but that causes an artificial increase in PR.... Oh, Man! That is some funny stuff.<<<
Its not yours to sell, but its yours to trade? I can only think of one other thing like that...(never mind) :)
sorry about the sarcasm
Shurlee - when you're not kicking ppl with your army boots ;) you make a really good point - I'd have to be thinking pretty 1 dimensionally if I didn't admit I've been trading PR for a quite a while now, I've just never introduced this currency in to the trade before.
roundabout - I depend very seriously on google for my income - it's not a hobby but ethics can not be ignored - for me anyway.
You are confusing ethics & legality.
I would actually be a lot more serious about ethics than law - which do you think is more important - the laws of right and wrong or the laws of politicians? Man this is getting heavy... :)
Ethics vary a great deal from person to person.
One man's spam is anothers business tatic. One man's fight for freedom, is anothers terrorism. It's all relative.
In terms of business, what you do to progress ahead is irrelevant. What your peers say about you is irrelevant. How you justify it to yourself is irrelevant.
But when you enter the realms of faking your way into the SERP's you are pushing what is "ethical" to the limit. You are infringing on someone else's business by breaking their rules (Google). You are dergrading the quality of their product. What would you do if someone did that to you? probably come here and moan about it I would imagine.
Then you are lying to surfers by giving them the impression that you something you are not.
Like a few years ago when people thought:
"Hmmm, keywords get me traffic, eh? How i about if i just add a long list of keywords at the bottom of the page...."
But that was fixed, so then:
"Hmmm, they worked that out, so how about if i make then the same colour as the background? Then Google won't be able to see them...."
But they worked that one out too, so:
"Hmmm, so inbound links help with ranking, eh? Well I could just make copies of my site and link em all together...."
No sorry, out of the index, so:
"Hmmm, so PR helps with ranking, does it? Well, hey, I can just buy links from someone else..."
The saga of the spammer and the ever changing algo continues..... :)
Bottom line is:
Even if PR has a great impact on rankings, the fact that more and more people are buying and selling high PR link means that Google will eventually filter it out of their algo.
Scott
Believe it or not, I'm not the young, hotblooded, sexy redhead most of you might think I am. I've actually been around the block a time or two and in my travels, I''ve had occassion to deal with more than a few people, professionally and personally, who claim to have marekting degrees as our own Marketing Guy has claimed. However, I have never heard even one of them referring to the process of selling add-on products to a core target market, (as in the case of the donut boy wanting a link from a milk site), as bleeding money out of people. I think they have referred to selling milk to donut buyers as marketing.
I'm not disputing your claim of a degree in marketing, I just wonder what school it is that teaches bleeding money out of people. I apologize for just not getting it but if this is a discussion about ethics in regards to marketing, then I'm left feeling like I'm locked in a battle of wits with unarmed opponents.
I think that anyone who claims to be an SEO, yet judges the ethics of his peers for using at least some of the same techniques for the exact same objective, is the eptiome of hypocrisy. I think anyhone who claims that THAT guy is unethical because he buys or sells the PR of HIS OWN PAGE, and then states publicly that he would never buy an ad because he can get traffic for free is not only hypocritcal, but quite possibly delusional as well.
I believe Judge Jeffries summed up the entire question for me quite succinctly and I think I will use that to take my leave of this thread. I don't really have the time to spare. It's bikini wax day.
as a site owner I can sell links for whatever reason I choose to. if it is for PR and other people think it is unethical I could give a flying crap. don't buy one if you don't like the idea.
people also keep chiming in 'it's against Google's TOS, that makes it illegal'. yeah, right!
*MY* TOS says -- "any engine that spiders this site can only do so if they agree to never penalize me for selling PR."
I don't ask for google to come spider me, but they do anyway. I assume they read my TOS since they are using my site for their financial benefit.
If google penalizes me for selling PR, that is completely against my TOS and they are now acting unethically and illegally according to most of the arguments posted here.
strange that google can use my site for their benefit while ignoring my TOS, but if I use my own site as I choose they can penalize me.
Why even bother wasting your time and ours if all your going to do is resort to personal attacks and narrow minded comments?
You have added absolutely nothing of any use to the discussion.
OK before, we weren't all in agreement at least a decent discussion was taking place. Then you bust the door down and started critising everyone.
You have stormed onto this thread throwing your opinions about left, right and centre, without even a glimpse of a strong arguement - all you seem capable of is mockery and ridiculous arguements.
>I think anyhone who claims that THAT guy is unethical because he buys or sells the PR of HIS OWN PAGE, and then states publicly that he would never buy an ad because he can get traffic for free is not only hypocritcal, but quite possibly delusional as well.
Im sorry but that just doesnt make any sense whatsoever. I cant see any basis at all to support what you have said there.
You are comparing buying a high PR link to standard SEO techniques? The former is a cheap amatuerish tatic that any idiot could pull off and the latter requires a great deal of skill.
I think your problem is that you have run around advocating PR buying to all your clients (how much of a mark up do you take BTW?) and then got in a big ol huff when you came here to see people calling it unethical.
I'll simplify it for you. Ethics aside - it's amatuerish. It shows desperation and lack of professionalism and ability to achieve results any other way.
>I'm not disputing your claim of a degree in marketing
> I''ve had occassion to deal with more than a few people, professionally and personally, who claim to have marekting degrees as our own Marketing Guy has claimed.
And you're calling me a hypocrit?
>However, I have never heard even one of them referring to the process of selling add-on products to a core target market, (as in the case of the donut boy wanting a link from a milk site), as bleeding money out of people. I think they have referred to selling milk to donut buyers as marketing.
Selling is Sales not Marketing.
Granted, sales is part of marketing, but so is economics, consumer behviour, branding, long term strategy, advertising, etc.
And no matter how you like to justify it, selling add-on products to your core marketing IS trying to bleed money out of them.
It's acceptable in business, yes. But that doesn't change what it is - so don't try to gloss over it to make yourself feel better. Consumers won't be any better of because you sell proverbial milk to them - they will just be out of pocket, so don't kid yourself.
>I apologize for just not getting it but if this is a discussion about ethics in regards to marketing, then I'm left feeling like I'm locked in a battle of wits with unarmed opponents.
Really?
I think that you came onto this thread looking for an arguement from your first post.
I think your initial sexist remarks were an indicator to all of us that we should have left you in your own little world right there.
I think that you clearly have been operating under your own rules, justifying your actions as *business*.
I think you have been overcharging your clients for results that any competent SEO's wouldnt need to pay for.
I think you have got your back up, because you found this gold mine of a site and tried to establish your own mark on it, but then realised that if a lot of the members here would most likely look down your <ahem> business practices.
My advice would be to stick around and read up on how SEO professionals achieve results (that's real SEO professionals, not just pretend ones).
While you're at it, it may be worthwhile to take some notes on how to contribute to threads without the attitude. You might get a more positive response.
>Believe it or not, I'm not the young, hotblooded, sexy redhead most of you might think I am.
There's a frontpage story right there. Hold the presses!
>It's bikini wax day.
A lesson for all of us - no matter how bad things get, you could always have that job. ;)
Big hugs and kisses @ Shurley! :)
Scott
Thanks for all the input - I think everyone has a pretty valid argument and I'm as confused now as ever.
However this thread was just started to kill some time before the update - no point in falling out over PR :)
I will say that I feel that ethics has a very important place in business and buying PR is a personal choice - I wouldn't fault anyone for thinking either way - just do what your concience tells you to ;)
Good luck to everyone with the update!
The fact that they do not like or encourage the sale of PR is neither here nor there, its not illegal and its only immoral or unethical if you think it is. Sale and exchange are exactly the same thing as valuable considearation passes, so what exactly is Googles beef about sale of PR.
Look, the only thing that counts is whether Google approves of buying and selling PageRank. If Google doesn't (a reasonable assumption), then it may well choose to go after sites that are known or strongly suspected to buy and sell PR. And while it obviously isn't practical for Google to identify every offender, it can make an example of the more obvious or easily caught offenders by either applying a PR penalty or--more likely--by discounting the PR that is passed along by sites like Fxx or Wxxxxxxground. Preventing "PR trickle-down" from the sellers' links would provide buyers and sellers with an incentive for shaping up:
1) The buyers would realize, within a Google update cycle or two, that their expenditures for PR were a waste of money.
2) The sellers would no longer make money from selling PR, and--just as important--they'd suffer a loss of traffic and revenue on their internal pages.
Google doesn't have to go after every seller or buyer of PR to make such indirect financial penalties effective. It just has to nab enough high-profile buyers and sellers to make other Webmasters think twice before playing the "PR as a marketable commodity" game.
They were selling PR, right?
(haven't really read up on the story).
Scott
I think that anyone who claims to be an SEO, yet judges the ethics of his peers for using at least some of the same techniques for the exact same objective, is the eptiome of hypocrisy. I think anyhone who claims that THAT guy is unethical because he buys or sells the PR of HIS OWN PAGE, and then states publicly that he would never buy an ad because he can get traffic for free is not only hypocritcal, but quite possibly delusional as well.
Although I don't agree totally with everything you posted shirlee - the above statement is 100% accurate and wholeheartedly agree.
Judge yourself... most critically first before casting stones... we all have skeleton's in the closet whether we wish to admit it or not. ;)
No one said that you couldn't do what you want with your site. Sell links, don't sell links, whatever. This was a discussion about ethics and PR.
Isn't that what we do at WW, express our opinions? Share our thoughts?
Shurlee,
You are some piece of work. You resort to insults right out of the gate. You imply that everyone else is ignorant or stupid. Perhaps if I had a **** I'd be able to keep up your immense intellect.
I understand your position. You make money by convincing clients to spend vast sums buying PR. It makes you money, it makes them money. You don't think it's unethical, we got it.
Instead of simply trying to convince others by using logic and sound argument, you try to degrade and bully them.
So, in my opinion, your rants have no value.
Perhaps you have grown cynical from all those trips around the block.
All:
In the end it's about personal choice. Only you know what is right and wrong for you, you have your own code of ethics that you live by and that's as it should be.
I honestly don't care if someone sells PR. That's their choice.
Great thread though! Really killed some time!
in the long term, if your site needs to buy pr to survive, google will kill it eventually, since it has no inherent value. if it has value, the why does it matter where you get a bit of popularity from? why is buying a link any different morally to exchanging recirpocal links?
if you are known to be buying or selling pr, and google percieve that your actions are damaging their results, they will step on you - as is their right. if you buy a pr8 link, and get loadsa traffic, and dont get caught,cool. you are making out of google, as is your right
Now usuability, design and architecture are for PEOPLE... SEO is for bots and little roaming programs.
So to talk about one technique or another to be unethical or to result in pages that google doesn't really want in its index is a bit strange.
If Google doesn't want something they simply won't allow it. If that can't disallow it it's because no system is perfect.
I haven't really ever done SEO.. I optimize for people, but If I do, I'll do it for the spider... I won't do it for the spider and take care that its socially or ethnically acceptable.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing SEO, I'm just saying that it doesn't make sense to exclude a technique if it works. And if spam works, spammers use it. That's why Google is trying to improve their algorythm.
As other have said before, quantity (spamming) for the short term (until penalisation or algo change) and quality for the long term (google allowed SEO tactics and RPO-real people optimization). Ultimately google wants an algorithm that prevents ALL pure SEO and equates SEO to RPO, so that all us SEOers become RPOers... in fect when Google perfects its algorithm, SEO is basically dead.
No Don't shoot me, it's all in good humour and not to be taken too seriously! ;)
SN
[edited by: killroy at 4:12 pm (utc) on April 11, 2003]
Sorry Fathom, I disagree on the whole. I was gonna write an explanation as to why, but it's pretty lengthy and repeats half of what ive said before. :)
Basically - I believe Shurleys statement that you quoted in your post has twisted the words and meaning of my posts.
Quick summary:
I believe buying PR is unethical - it gives an unjustified advantage over others and it's against Google's TOS.
I do not paying for advertising because i spent 4 years studying marketing so I didnt need to. Thanks largely to WW I am able to drive traffic to my sites for free.
Those two statements do not make me a hypocrit.
>Great thread though! Really killed some time!
Hehe ethics is always a hot topic. Wait till the next Spam debate crops up - they're fun too! :)
Scott
I paid for it, so it is justified just like any other ad I would buy.
As I said before, Google's TOS has nothing to do with it. They *choose* to spider my sites for their benefit. They should check my TOS, not the other way around.
It is up to them to keep track of who they spider. I can't possibly be expected to obey the TOS of whomever may choose to spider my site.
Ive got to say i totally agree on the site spidering deal.
But I still feel paying for an advantage in SERP's is unethical.
Scott
Many business don't pay for advertising, but those that do have a significant advantage over those that do not.
If you say you are selling PR, that's an issue only because that is Google's term. If I was selling links based on my 'significant link popularity' there should not be an issue at all.
So, doesn't that make all SEO work unethical?
Ethically it's exactly the same as when he buys an ad in a magazine. He's after targeted traffic, plain and simple.
@MarketingGuy ... you said:
<<I do not paying for advertising because i spent 4 years studying marketing so I didnt need to. Thanks largely to WW I am able to drive traffic to my sites for free.>>
If your marketing studies taught you to disdain advertising they did you no favours!
