The Ongoing PageRank Massacre Hits Big Players

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by nipplecharms1

MJ I think you miss my point. Good experience for the end user? Are you kidding? I was being sarcastic. When you are a monopoly, you can do what you want, when you want, to whom you want. Google does not give a rat's a$$ about anything other than what their INVESTOR'S think. Anything else for the rest of us is just icing on the cake.

If you do not understand that, no offense, then you do not understand capitalism at its core. MJ, we have spoken before and you are not dumb. Do not believe that Google is NOW into anything other than the bottom line.

Michael

No, I didn't miss your point, and I did know you were being sarcastic ... actually I think you must have missed *my* point ...
as I can't see how you find disagreement with what I said. I said they do it for the money!

Google's bottom line is directly influenced by providing the most relevant results - I would venture to say it's their central mission and well it should be.

I believe I do understand capitalism quite well and embrace it. And Google is capitilizing on providing the most relevant results. Perhaps they do only care about the end user as it affects their bottom line. So, what? If they stop doing a good job, the end users will vote with their keyboard for anoher SE.

I just don't think its sinister ... perhaps that's where we disagree. I approve of capitialism and I approve of how Google is looking out for their bottom line and their investor's opinion.

[tamecrow]

On the topic of TBPR, YouTube are back up to an 8.

[crankydave]

Oh where oh where have my green pixels gone,
Oh where oh where can they beeeeee...
With my green bar turned off,
And my stat counter on,
The green pixels mean nothing to meeeeeeeee.



Dave

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Google's bottom line is directly influenced by providing the most relevant results - I would venture to say it's their central mission and well it should be.

No and No. Most relevant has nothing to do with it once you are as big as a Google or a Microsoft. End of story. They can do and will do anything they want.

You can have any search you want as long as its black. (Play on the old Model T Fords for those of you too young..... Ford said you can have the Model T car, they had a monopoly on inexpensive cars, and said you can order it in any color, so long as that color was BLACK!)

Michael

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Oh where oh where have my green pixels gone,
Oh where oh where can they beeeeee...
With my green bar turned off,
And my stat counter on,
The green pixels mean nothing to meeeeeeeee.



Dave

ROFLMAO - You go Davy! LOL

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by nipplecharms1

No and No. Most relevant has nothing to do with it once you are as big as a Google or a Microsoft. End of story. They can do and will do anything they want.

You can have any search you want as long as its black. (Play on the old Model T Fords for those of you too young..... Ford said you can have the Model T car, they had a monopoly on inexpensive cars, and said you can order it in any color, so long as that color was BLACK!)

Michael

Let's compare apples to apples. (And let's not muddy the waters with Microsoft has that is irrelevant to the topic.)

Google is not telling us we can only have the Model T and only in black.
Google is not a monopoly as there are other SEs available. Many, many others.

AT&T was a monopoly when that was your only choice for telephone service. But we have endless choices for search. Google does monopolize the search market, but that's by popular vote with our keyboards.

Sounds like sour grapes to me, Michael. Are you having trouble getting good results in Google?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Sounds like sour grapes to me, Michael. Are you having trouble getting good results in Google?

You can be very sure MJ that his has the best possible results for his niche in all 3 major SE.

[weslinda]

I think that this comes back to the real issue with companies and their web sites. In the end you really must focus on high quality, well structured content on each and every page of your site.

Trying to game the system will get you slapped.

I'm interested to see that no one has mentioned the issue that people resting their entire business one source of income.

And regarding Google providing the most relevant results and that's their concern, obviously you haven't seen Google's results. Most relevant is tough to follow.

Their financial interest is to make the most money for their largest advertisers so those advertisers continue advertising and spend more money each and every year.

[scanmonkey]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Did you ever try to measure how much weight does that 1 out of 200 factors have? Observing Google the last couple months, and what is going on now, tell me that it gained a lot of weight. -

Google is getting irrational with the "Paid Links are Evil" campaign. Hand editing pagerank and pr updates based on link selling shows google's obsession.

Matt Cutts emailed Search Engine Journal to tell us that the last PageRank update was part of Google’s campaign against paid linking and advertisement links.

The partial update to visible PageRank that went out a few days ago was primarily regarding PageRank selling and the forward links of sites. So paid links that pass PageRank would affect our opinion of a site.

Going forward, I expect that Google will be looking at additional sites that appear to be buying or selling PageRank.

There's a lot of talk that Google no longer believes in the pagerank values. Based on the fact that Google is now editing PageRank and relevancy scores based on the method of promotion not the quality of information.

[swcreations]

It seems to me that the Google shift with the roller coaster position placement and PR jumping started about the same time the G Ads payout dropped drastically.

Anyone else notice this?

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Let's compare apples to apples. (And let's not muddy the waters with Microsoft has that is irrelevant to the topic.)

Google is not telling us we can only have the Model T and only in black.
Google is not a monopoly as there are other SEs available. Many, many others.

AT&T was a monopoly when that was your only choice for telephone service. But we have endless choices for search. Google does monopolize the search market, but that's by popular vote with our keyboards.

Sounds like sour grapes to me, Michael. Are you having trouble getting good results in Google?

No sour grapes.. we are going just fine as Webnauts points out.

MJ, I think you may have missed Econ101. If you have 80+ % of the market, that is at the very least an oligopoly. I would venture to guess G borders on being a monopoly. And MS is very relevant here if you understand the thought process. It is one more example of a monolith that just does not care. Neither GOOG nor MSFT care anymore. MSFT, not for a long time, GOOG just recently. AT&T is not germane here because the government got involved. Look out GOOG, you are next!

Google is telling you can have it only in Black. They own the means of production. If you don’t like the way they do it, don’t use them. Its that simple. They make the rules we have to live by. I don’t mind that if it is a level playing field.

Then you go on to say they are not a monopoly but are they “MONOPOLIZE” the market. Po`tato, Pota`to. If you monopolize a market, you are then by default, a monopoly. A rose, Shakespeare wrote, by any other name….

So, I think I am right. I think once you (anyone) understand the motivation, they understand the beast. Google cares about the street, nothing more nothing less. If you can figure out how to work within that and make a buck great. Just remember that Google really only cares about the end user experience insofar as it effects people coming back and using that search engine. "End user" is not its primary concern any longer!

But enough about me! <wink>

Always loving the discussions....

Michael

[dartman]

LOL - you're on a roll there Mike.
Last I looked G accounts for roughly 55% of all www search making
them the dominant SE. I wouldn't consider G a monopoly just yet since
there are other popular mainstream SEs. I sometimes wonder how we
would all react if the top 2 merged.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by dartman

I sometimes wonder how we
would all react if the top 2 merged.

Do you really think that will ever happen?

[dartman]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Do you really think that will ever happen?

Probably not but if G continues to increase search share who knows what might happen.
I would not rule out G making an offer to buy Y at some point in time.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by dartman

LOL - you're on a roll there Mike.
Last I looked G accounts for roughly 55% of all www search making
them the dominant SE. I wouldn't consider G a monopoly just yet since
there are other popular mainstream SEs. I sometimes wonder how we
would all react if the top 2 merged.

There is a huge difference between a monopoly and a monopolistic position in an industry, like that Coca Cola has.

[incrediblehelp]

Here is an old fun thread some of you want want to look over:

Why WPW Should Not Discuss Google Toolbar PR Anymore

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Here is an old fun thread some of you want want to look over:

Why WPW Should Not Discuss Google Toolbar PR Anymore

My intention starting this thread was not to discuss the toolbar. My point was about the reaction of the big players. They also claim that the toolbar is non-sense, but they seem to be hurt very bad. Can you explain why?

Also, I guess I shall start a new thread about what is PageRank (NOT TOOLBAR!!!) and if it has something to do with rankings.

Stay tuned.

[incrediblehelp]

John your not making sense. The only thing that has changed (as far as we can tell) IS THE TOOLBAR PR. This is what has effected the "big players" This is what everyone is talking about. If you want to start a thread of internal PR please state it as such, but I have seen no evidence on how it has changed for the big players or how any of us would even know that without working at Google.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

John your not making sense. The only thing that has changed (as far as we can tell) IS THE TOOLBAR PR. This is what has effected the "big players" This is what everyone is talking about. If you want to start a thread of internal PR please state it as such, but I have seen no evidence on how it has changed for the big players or how any of us would even know that without working at Google.

OK. I will try to be more clear:

If that toolbar PR thing is not important, why is this such a huge issue all over the WWW.
That is what I do not understand. Why do big players give comments and trying to figure out what did they do wrong, and so on.

[incrediblehelp]

That is a good question John. Maybe we should be asking the "big players" why they even care or at least educating them on what the TBPR really means or at least should mean to them

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

That is a good question John. Maybe we should be asking the "big players" why they even care or at least educating them on what the TBPR really means or at least should mean to them

Thanks Jaan! That is what I met brother.

[mjtaylor]

Never mind the big players; we're here to educate the little and middle players, right?

So, if TBPR is worthless, how do you assess PR in a meaningful way?

[incrediblehelp]

Not sure if I really ever assess PR. I assess success with clients with other metrics that are feasible, like traffic and conversions.

[wige]

Originally Posted by kgun

There is a huge difference between a monopoly and a monopolistic position in an industry, like that Coca Cola has.

Pepsi

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

That is a good question John. Maybe we should be asking the "big players" why they even care or at least educating them on what the TBPR really means or at least should mean to them

Well, as a microscopic player, I think the TBPR update is big news, in the way that an update to any other tool I occasionally use is big news. And I do use TBPR on rare occasions. I think of it like DNA in paternity cases - It can prove nothing, but it can disprove a lot. If there is any green in the bar, it disproves that the site was not crawled by Google and at least tolerated by Google at a time shortly before the last update (just like no DNA match disproves paternity). If the toolbar is gray or the PR is 0, that can indicate that the site was not known to Google at the time when the data was exported or that the site was penalized, which could help tracking down a ranking problem, but is not in and of itself proof of a problem (just like a DNA match does not prove paternity, just indicates the possibility or probability of it).

[kgun]

Death of Toolbar Pagerank

Originally Posted by kgun

Marketing is a type of drama.

Traditionally advertising, ad for short, was about information. Advertising was the the language of the product, the products spoken competence if you want.

Ad can differentiate similar products like Coke and Pepsi. The first is often related with exclusivity, with successful people. Among ad people, it is accepted that the brand is more kown on the earth than the American flag. You find empty bottles in inner Mongolia, on Greenland, in Moscow, in Cartagena, in the Redwood forest, in the Goldswim Water and in the Thames. You find it on Norwegian claciers, on the Chinese Wall, at the top of the Eifell Tower and in the Leaning Tower of Pisa. There is no wonder if you find it on the moon or even on Mars. A bottle with the brand may have been forgotton in a mars vehicle by an engineer. I am sure that you find the bottle in the stomac of sharks and other animals. The brand is worth trillions and the world's best investor, Warren Buffett, likes to be related to the brand and his company has invested a lot of money in the company, that is, in the brand. How is it possible to differentiate Coke and Pepsi? Is there a magical secret formula? Isn’t both brown water with sugar and gas? Is there a difference in colour? Is there a difference in taste? Ad is the answer. If you aim at being exclusive, buy Coke. SAM'S choice is definitely not for persons like Warren Buffett.

Ad has never been objective and is very subjective in nature, in short, it is subjective sell propaganda. In that respect, ad is cunning, treachery and reduced to the least common denominator, trickery.

Humor is very important, since it reduces your ability to think critical. Very often ad appeals to your sub consciousness. Soap operas, where ad is shown in milliseconds. You do not register the message or the brand, but your subconsciousness does. Ad does not reflect reality. It reflects your dream about reality and that is quite another story. It is possible to sell nearly anything if the ad message is good enough. It is told that you can not buy luck and success. That is the exact purpose of advertising. It tells you that it is possible to buy luck and success.

When a company buys ad it buys a public. It buys the exclusive part of the population or young people. It buys you who want to be in, it buys you who want to be successful. It buys you who want to be obeserved with a coke in your hand or have a nearly filled green indicator on your internet site. You do not need to use words. The whole world can see that you are successful. You drive on the left side of the road. You are from UK and part of the Commonwealth. The rest of us other idiots drive on the right side. Now, Norwegian research, has even proved that for one reason or another it is more safe to drive on the left side. Did you say ad is information? It can be proved that the rest of the world is wrong and UK and some countries in the former British Commonwealth are correct. It may save lives if the rest of the world change their stupid practice of driving on the right side of the road.

In my left brain there is nothing right, and in the right part there is nothing left. Yes, you can sell expensive air or more precisely, smell with ad. You find some of the strongest brands in the smell industry. You may have the best product in the world. Without ad, you have no chance. Removing the Coke brand from the earth or Google’s little green indicator (unless Google wants it removed) is more difficult than tearing down the wall in Berlin. Only idiots fight Mr market. He is the worst dictator you ever meet, and he is always correct (at least in the long run). The Iron Curtain fell. Coke and Google's little green bar will (depending on Google's agenda) be there decades after this story was written in Moss, Norway 20th august 2007.

Did you say that the Queen of England buys ...

(C) kgun WPW member and owner of RedCarpetRank.com, PurpleRank.com and OrangeRank.com.

Google Management

<quote>
Sergey Brin
..............

Sergey's research interests include search engines, information extraction from unstructured sources, and data mining of large text collections and scientific data. He has published more than a dozen academic papers, including Extracting Patterns and Relations from the World Wide Web; Dynamic Data Mining: A New Architecture for Data with High Dimensionality, which he published with Larry Page; Scalable Techniques for Mining Casual Structures; Dynamic Itemset Counting and Implication Rules for Market Basket Data; and Beyond Market Baskets: Generalizing Association Rules to Correlations.
</quote>

My bolding.

<quote>
Shona Brown
.....................

She has taught in the Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Graduate School of Business at Stanford University and within McKinsey's mini-MBA program. She is the author of the best-selling business book, Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos, which introduced a new strategic model for competing in volatile markets, and she has published broadly in both applied and academic journals.
</quote>

My bolding.

To repeat.

Originally Posted by kgun

Marketing is a type of drama.

Removing the Coke brand from the earth or Google’s little green indicator (unless Google wants it removed) is more difficult than tearing down the wall in Berlin.

Would any of you remove an indicator that gets so much attention?

[dartman]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

So, if TBPR is worthless, how do you assess PR in a meaningful way?

Not to cause a fuss but imo what matters is traffic and conversions (thanks Jaan) - the volume of which
generally being a function of search result position. If a site is top 5 does it really matter what the
quantitative value of PR is? I'm sure good PR is what helps get a site to top 5 however one can find sites
on deeper result pages (pg 2, 4, 5, etc) that have higher PR.
Further - my sig site is PR 4 and is the #1 site for my primary and several secondary keywords/phrases.
If I lose PR but remain at #1 then why should I be concerned? The traffic comes from being #1, not the
color of a toolbar or other PR metrics.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

So, if TBPR is worthless, how do you assess PR in a meaningful way?

Google Webmaster Tools.

[mjtaylor]

You can see PR of sites that are not your own in Webmaster Tools?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

You can see PR of sites that are not your own in Webmaster Tools?

Well, that would not be so simple. Sorry, but I thought you were about your own PR.

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

So, if TBPR is worthless, how do you assess PR in a meaningful way?

I don't know how accurate one can get but then again, I don't know how accurate one needs to be in the first place but, what I look for to get an indication of Google's internal PageRank is to look for its most likely effects.

For example, if all the pages of a site are in the Main index, I know that where PageRank has an influence, there is enough PageRank. The actual relative amount doesn't really matter at that point.

If all the available pages are in the Main index, having a higher PageRank isn't going to get pages that don't exist indexed.

Also, although a less direct indication, if new pages I add are indexed quickly and changes I make to existing pages are caught relatively soon, I would again assume PageRank being somewhat decent.

Here again, I don't really care what the absolute amount of PageRank is, just whether or not it is enough for a site to perform as I would hope it would.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by dartman

The traffic comes from being #1, not the
color of a toolbar or other PR metrics.

Did you note the following

Originally Posted by kgun

Ad does not reflect reality. It reflects your dream about reality and that is quite another story. It is possible to sell nearly anything if the ad message is good enough. It is told that you can not buy luck and success. That is the exact purpose of advertising. It tells you that it is possible to buy luck and success.

Can you quote a scientific report, not doing spurious correlation, that rejects the following:

Hypothesis: There is a relationship between a page's (site's overall) toolbar PageRank and position on the SERP.

P.S. By overall toolbar PageRank I mean, that it is not enough to look at the PageRank of the relevant page, but also of the home page and the rest of the pages, especially if those pages have related content.

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by kgun

Can you quote a scientific report, not doing spurious correlation, that rejects the following:

Hypothesis: There is a relationship between a page's (site's overall) toolbar PageRank and position on the SERP.

Can you quote a scientific report that proves it?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

Can you quote a scientific report that proves it?

No.

But I know very much about spurious correlation, since I have a course on the master level in Bayesian statistics in addition to a course on the Dr. Scientlevel in numerical analysis.

You are from Japan, and should know about ITO and Akaike's information criterion

So you should know about stochastic processes integrated of order 2 (I(2)), of order 1 (I(1)) and of order 0 (I(0)) that is stationary.

It is a spurious regression if you have the following situation.

Left side : Right side

I(0) ........... I(1)

By adding more terms on the right side it may conintegrate and become stationary that is I(0). Ceteris paribus, meaningful regression

As an example. A random walk is I(1). When time goes to infinity the t-statistic between 2 random walk series goes to infinity, too. Spurious, that is garbage regression.

Conclusion:
In lack of any serious scientific report, we can not conclude anything about the above hypothesis.

P.S. Example of a time series that may be integrated of order 2. The price level. Then, changes in the price level, per definition the inflation rate, should integrate of order 1, I(1).

[dartman]

Originally Posted by kgun

Hypothesis: There is a relationship between a page's (site's overall) toolbar PageRank and position on the SERP.

My take - true PR (googles measurement/analysis of the importance of a page), not TBPR, contributes to position
on a serp. PR is but one of the many (some unknown) factors that determines where a site fits in on the serp.

Ad vs. traffic.
Your initial "ad message" (page title and description that appears as a search result) is probably the most important element
that will create a click (traffic). If you're ranked in a top search position and your "ad message" fits the users query then
you would most likely receive a significant amount of traffic (clicks) compared to other sites ranked lower on the serp.

Further-
A G search results page does not list any PR or TBPR. It lists search results based on what it determines are the most
appropriate listings based on the users search query. That said, PR and TBPR does not create traffic or clicks.
Realistically, how many everyday G users really care about the green bar if in fact they have this on their browser.
Seems the only people that place any significance on the TBPR are those involved in web marketing and are looking
for the (perceived) better sites for nothing other then links.

JMO

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by kgun

No.

But I know very much about spurious correlation, since I have a course on the master level in Bayesian statistics in addition to a course on the Dr. Scientlevel in numerical analysis.

You are from Japan, and should know about ITO and Akaike's information criterion

So you should know about stochastic processes integrated of order 2 (I(2)), of order 1 (I(1)) and of order 0 (I(0)) that is stationary.

It is a spurious regression if you have the following situation.

Left side : Right side

I(0) ........... I(1)

By adding more terms on the right side it may conintegrate and become stationary that is I(0). Ceteris paribus, meaningful regression

As an example. A random walk is I(1). When time goes to infinity the t-statistic between 2 random walk series goes to infinity, too. Spurious, that is garbage regression.

Damn! I sure hope you don't charge consultancy fees on a per word basis!

Originally Posted by kgun

Conclusion:
In lack of any serious scientific report, we can not conclude anything about the above hypothesis.

There! Now that's something I can afford!

[Tubby]

re Kgun
"Hypothesis: There is a relationship between a page's (site's overall) toolbar PageRank and position on the SERP."

Originally Posted by cass-hacks
Can you quote a scientific report that proves it?

No, there can not be one. TBR rank is a variable, and nobody seems to know when, what and how it varies. any 'value' today could be different tomorrow. The relationship is also probably a variable. It certainly seems to be a diminishing relationship.

How diminished? should be the question. Everyone I know disagree on how diminished or not diminished the relationship is. this is tricky because of the multiplicity of contributing factors. Some factors can contribute to the end result that are not connected to the toolbar issue at all.. How would you separate a variation in a result if you can not pin point the cause. You simply cannot assign it to Toolbar page rank, simply because this is the only visible factor.

I am happy with Kguns Hypothesis: " There is a relationship between a page's (site's overall) toolbar PageRank and position on the SERP." Just that none of knows quite what it is....

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Tubby

re Kgun
"Hypothesis: There is a relationship between a page's (site's overall) toolbar PageRank and position on the SERP."

Originally Posted by cass-hacks
Can you quote a scientific report that proves it?

No, there can not be one. TBR rank is a variable, and nobody seems to know when, what and how it varies. any 'value' today could be different tomorrow. The relationship is also probably a variable. It certainly seems to be a diminishing relationship.

But the TB indicator may still be used in a pooled cross section / time series, that is, lantent variable analysis. That may be a very meaningful analysis. My personal intuition, there is a relationship. I for one look at ToolBarRank when and where I include links. It is far from the only factor of course.

Originally Posted by Tubby

re Kgun
How diminished? should be the question. Everyone I know disagree on how diminished or not diminished the relationship is. this is tricky because of the multiplicity of contributing factors. Some factors can contribute to the end result that are not connected to the toolbar issue at all.. How would you separate a variation in a result if you can not pin point the cause. You simply cannot assign it to Toolbar page rank, simply because this is the only visible factor.

May be diminished in the short run, but of increased importance in the long run if the algorithme has improved and it now better reflects "the age and importance" of a page / site. In a simultaneous dynamic equation analysis with n dependant variables (equations) and m independant variables, it is not difficult to figure out the individual contributions and test by formal statistical tests whether the contribution is significant and the function stable. There are also more formal test for causality like Granger and Sims causality. Correlation (a linear concept) is not a necessary condition for causality. The relation can be non linear. Plot points on a sheet of paper in a scatterplot around a parabola (eg. x independant variable and y = x*x dependant)). There is a strict nonlinear relationship, but the linear correlation is (close to) zero. A lot of relationships in nature are nonlinear, probably most relationships. A very actual non linear relationship IMO. Global Warming. (I do not say anything about the causes). Ice melting on the North Pole and Greenland goes much faster than the scientists predict. They may undershoot because they use wrong linear models.

Originally Posted by Tubby

I am happy with Kguns Hypothesis: " There is a relationship between a page's (site's overall) toolbar PageRank and position on the SERP." Just that none of knows quite what it is....

We seem to agree on that.

Some people have a better model in their head, than they can fomalize on paper. I am often very sceptical to those people.

[dartman]

Originally Posted by kgun

Some people have a better model in their head, than they can fomalize on paper.

I'll pose a very simple question that doesn't take a phd or a working knowledge of greek to answer -
If you could pick only 1 of the following mutually exclusive choices, which would it be and why?
a. The #1 search result position for your chosen niche.
b. A TBPR of 5

[dartman]

Do a Google search for> seo basics
The top site is TBPR 3
Sites on page 3 and 4 of the results have TBPR 5
So much for the importance of TBPR.
Case closed.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by dartman

I'll pose a very simple question that doesn't take a phd or a working knowledge of greek to answer -
If you could pick only 1 of the following mutually exclusive choices, which would it be and why?
a. The #1 search result position for your chosen niche.
b. A TBPR of 5

Mutually exclusive? Arn't you comparing apples (SERP position) and oranges (TbRank)? That is a meaningless comparison. I shall give a "meaningless answer since the question is meaningless".

• If I was looking for traffic, a of course.
• If I should sell the site or sell ad to a person believing high Tb pagrank is important, b, if TbRank(#1 search result) << TbRank(5)

That is another story about the importance of a site / page, since the page / site with a higher TbRank can give better SERP position for other KW's.

Then I would aks, if you can choose between two very similar (if that is possible - e.g. mature vs similar new -) sites in your niche, which would you choose? (Assumption 0 <= TbPagerank(individual page) <= 10)

1. Site A with 100 pages with total(TbPagerank) = 700.
2. Site B with 100 pages with total(TbPagerank) = 0.

Which of the following would you choose?

a. The #1 search result position for your chosen niche and TbRank of 10?
b. The #1 search result position for your chosen niche and TbRank of 0?

Which site do you think has the highest probability to keep the SERP position? To pose the question in another way. Do you find many pages / sites with TbRank of 0 that keep their position? What about TbRank of 10 pages / sites?

P.S.

Why does this equation have no solution? X and Y are both unknown magnitudes.

X + 2Y = 10.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by dartman

Do a Google search for> seo basics
The top site is TBPR 3
Sites on page 3 and 4 of the results have TBPR 5
So much for the importance of TBPR.
Case closed.

Natural to close the case on generalizing from a few examples to a general situation. That is what I personally call unqualified guessing about a relationship.

[weslinda]

So a page with TBPR of 5 should rank higher for every search term compared to another page even if they are slightly off topic of each other? Come on, that's one of the weakest arguments I've ever heard.

[dartman]

Originally Posted by kgun

But the TB indicator may still be used in a pooled cross section / time series, that is, lantent variable analysis. That may be a very meaningful analysis. My personal intuition, there is a relationship. I for one look at ToolBarRank when and where I include links. It is far from the only factor of course.

TBPR means squat as do your equations.
What sort of variable analysis can be done when a TBPR remains constant genius?
What analysis is meaningful when TBPR is "manually" adjusted and not a result of algorithmic adjustments?

"Mutually exclusive" choice means choosing one or the other, not both.
Or - serp position "without regard" to TBPR and vice versa.
The question aims to ask what is more important to you given the singular choice.

TBPR does not impact serp position but apparently you disagree. So be it - you are entitled
to your opinion.

Comparing apples and oranges??
You infer that TBPR has a cause and effect on serp position and you ask about apples and oranges?
I agree, your response is meaningless. Actually I consider it dribble.

This thread is about loss of TBPR however it appears that altho some sites lost a measure of green line
their serp position remined the same. Futher proof that TBPR is meaningless.

If you choose to further debate the importance of TBPR vs. serp position please be good enough to
omit the equations, references to your graduate courses and other nonrelated pompousness as these
are meaningless to the thread.

[dartman]

Originally Posted by weslinda

So a page with TBPR of 5 should rank higher for every search term compared to another page even if they are slightly off topic of each other? Come on, that's one of the weakest arguments I've ever heard.

Are you referring to my post?
If so I'm saying that higher TBPR does Not produce higher serp rank.
Proven by the example given.

[dartman]

Originally Posted by kgun

Natural to close the case on generalizing from a few examples to a general situation. That is what I personally call unqualified guessing about a relationship.

On the contrary professor - it's a specific example about a specific situation which is that
higher TBPR does NOT equate to a higher serp rank. There are sites in my own niche that
have higher TBPR but are serp ranked much lower then mine. I'm sure we've all seen this
numerous times but if you wish to call it guessing then that's your opinion.

[swcreations]

I think it is good to review information about the TBPR however it is one search engine's (however dominant) way of reviewing websites. It seems most people's rank dropped one point during the last update. This just means the criteria to meet the particular rank has just adjusted to the left.

It does seem like energy would be better spent focusing on what our customer's want . In the end that is what determines the success of a business. Most of consumers aren't looking at the PR ranking when they decide to purchase from a company anyways.

[Webnauts]

Kgun, I am looking forward to hear what others think about your post. It sounds very interesting. I am not ready to respond yet. But I sure will in a while.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by dartman

This thread is about loss of TBPR however it appears that altho some sites lost a measure of green line
their serp position remined the same. Futher proof that TBPR is meaningless.

Can you give some examples of such sites? I would like to follow up this observation myself.

Thanks.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by swcreations

Most of consumers aren't looking at the PR ranking when they decide to purchase from a company anyways.

I am sorry, but from my experience, I cannot agree with you all the way.

And something interesting about this: Google algorithm tweak spooks WWW - web - Technology - theage.com.au

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Can you give some examples of such sites? I would like to follow up this observation myself.

CASS-Hacks - PHP, Javacript and CSS

Previous to the recent toolbar PageRank update was a 4 for the entrance and a 3 for internals. Now it is a 3 and a 2 respectively.

SERPs positions haven't changed, the number of indexed pages hasn't changed and google sourced traffic if anything, has only been steadily increasing since the site went live.

There was a short period of time when everything crashed but the cause of that is known and after the experiment concluded, everything continued as if nothing had happened anyway.