How Much of the Original PageRank Formula Still Matters?

[Webnauts]

I was just reading this post of Randfish at SEOMOZ:

Obviously, the toolbar PageRank is barely worth watching, but what about that original formula? This very well researched page on the subject recently made the top of Digg and shows through example how PR would be calculated in several linking examples. But, what I'm curious about is what role that portion of the "over 100 factors" PageRank plays. I had been a skeptic for a long time that it was anything more than 5-10%, but recently, I've been wondering if there might be a bit more weight to it than that (possibly a full 20-30%).

Source: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/questions...-i-cant-answer

What do you think?

[Feydakin]

I can't answer with any testing to back it up other than random observations on a couple sites I follow closely..

I think that the internal page rank still plays a rather significant role in determining SERP location.. What I think has changed is how that page rank is determined internally with regards to the various methods of linking (recip, 3way, 1 way, directory, blog, etc.).. This is why building a diverse link strategy can be so important to ranking well and staying there..

As the link benefits fluctuate due to changes in the weight each type of link is a diverse strategy is better able to weather those changes with less fluctuation in the SERPs.. A narrow strategy can be easy to spot when you see someone come in and post, I used to rank #2 and now I'm nowhere to be found..

[kgun]

How Much of the Original PageRank Formula Still?

John, you are a moderator:

Whether you like the egg or the hen, there is a relation between PageRank and the position on the SERP. What came first (relevant backlinks) the egg or (SERP position) the hen?

I use egg for breakfast and chicken / hen for dinner.

And I think Google is better on fighting spam now. It is perhaps not so easy to buy PageRank as before either. Personally, I may prefer the Directory PageRank. I do not look too much at the green indicator, but since I started to use FireFox, I installed the Google toolbar with the green indicator.

In short my private conclusion:
Google is now better on filtering SERP and PageRank spam.

Personal advice:
Do not use too much time on that indicator. Write man, write ...

[Gennady]

This is a very good question. One which I do not have an education answer for. However, I'm not trying to be 'smart' here but honestly, does it really matter? Maybe I'm missing something here.

Originally Posted by kgun

Do not use too much time on that indicator. Write man, write ...

I agree with this. You can also add: structure you site navigation right.

[incrediblehelp]

Since I (not sure who really can) connect/correlate PR to SERPs for web documents, I don't worry about PR. Just focus on the core elements of getting web documents relevant visitors.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

John, you are a moderator:

Whether you like the egg or the hen, there is a relation between PageRank and the position on the SERP. What came first (relevant backlinks) the egg or (SERP position) the hen?

What the heck are you talking about Kjel? Did I ever say something different? Look around in the forums, and then blame me is I said something else.

Originally Posted by kgun

I use egg for breakfast and chicken / hen for dinner.

I do to. But many others are vegans here. LOL

[Webnauts]

I guess everyone here for some reason are going off-topic.

Just to make my position here about PageRank:

I am convinced that PageRank is an important factor for SERP and an excellent measurement tool for web sites relevancy.

That was always my opinion, and will remain until that changes.

So again the question was:

How much weight do you think PageRank has today?
5%? 10%? 20%? 30%?

If you can not tell a number: Did it increase or did it decrease?

[Feydakin]

I don't think the importance of page rank has increased or decreased yet.. I think that as the algos evolve (LSI) we may see it play less and less of a role.. But as an indication of a decent site it's still a pretty good measure, even if it is somewhat easy to manipulate.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

How much weight do you think PageRank has today? 5%? 10%? 20%? 30%?

ZERO to me. Isn't that all that counts? LOL, just kidding.

As you know real PR in the "background" is highly factored into the overall weighting of web documents. Toolbar PR is so outdated I cant see how it would ever be factored into ranking formula. Are we done with this toolbar conversation yet?

[Feydakin]

I never thought we were talking about Foolbar PR..

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

I never thought we were talking about Foolbar PR..

Sorry your right, we aren't. I apologize John.

I would have to say IBL quality (which I feel represents PR) is factored a lot into the Google ranking factor. I wouldn't disagree with numbers as high as 20-30% as Rand has suggested.

[Webnauts]

Hey Jaan, I honestly thought that you misunderstood me. LOL
I would also like to add here, that whenever I make statements about PagRank, I never mean that toolbar crap. Just to avoid any misunderstandings in the future when I post something about that. ;)

And we are not novice or intermediate level SEOs man. :)

By the way, if Rand is right, I guess we better stop talking here and go for quality backlinks.

[incrediblehelp]

Speaking of PR, looks like Google is selling more of it:

Google Selling PageRank, Again

Pathetic...

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

...we better stop talking here and go for quality backlinks...

Way ahead of you my man.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Speaking of PR, looks like Google is selling more of it:

Google Selling PageRank, Again

Pathetic...

I would call that: Capitalism. ;)

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I would call that: Capitalism. ;)

I call it hypocritical...I call it the pot calling the kettle black...I call it....

[Feydakin]

I demand a nofollow on those links.. Paid links are evil and shouldn't be used.. They are borderline black hat.. [/Matt Cutts channeling]

So, if they are paid sponsors they are bad.. But if they are 'partners' it's ok.. Got it Google.. Thanks for that..

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

I demand a nofollow on those links.. Paid links are evil and shouldn't be used.. They are borderline black hat.. [/Matt Cutts channeling]

So, if they are paid sponsors they are bad.. But if they are 'partners' it's ok.. Got it Google.. Thanks for that..

If all this is true, I honestly love the idea!

[westie]

Interesting question (as always from webnauts) about pageranks relevance. I think its certainly less important than it was few years ago but it is still at the heart of google algo. But I've given up trying to figure out the algo - too much to read - just let the bots figure it out ;-)

But it looks like big G is going in a different direction any way - diversifying into other areas. See incredibles link - this seems to be part of the move to provide Enterprise Apps as an alternative to MS Office

http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=197008513

This is a BIG move for G I'm sure search will still be paramount but they could soon become a very different company. Be interesting to see what the response is from MS!

regards