help:What is Google PR leaking?

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I'd rather say "its not" if its your misspelling there for "its now" The answer is: the PR for your INTERNAL needs is NOT a function based upon outbound links, on the other hand, the outbound PR power you wanted to give to another site will be less if you have other outbound links,- so it IS a function of outbound links for the outbound PR flow! The internal PR flow works the same, less internal links - more PR power to the page you link to and you link from.

And, the most important! You will not lose your PR authority for serch engine result positions (which is THE number 1 factor for you, i hope) if you link out to other related quality sites! Now, please tell me, have you ever lost your positions because of that?

This makes even less sense than your previous posts.

Confucius say... When in hole, stop digging.

Dave

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by crankydave

This makes even less sense than your previous posts.

Confucius say... When in hole, stop digging.

Dave

Do you mean you understand less, or you disagree more?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

the PR for your INTERNAL needs is NOT a function based upon outbound links,

WHat?

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

on the other hand, the outbound PR power you wanted to give to another site will be less if you have other outbound links,- so it IS a function of outbound links for the outbound PR flow! The internal PR flow works the same, less internal links - more PR power to the page you link to and you link from.

And, the most important! You will not lose your PR authority for serch engine result positions (which is THE number 1 factor for you, i hope) if you link out to other related quality sites! Now, please tell me, have you ever lost your positions because of that?

1. There is only one pr, there is not one for internal and one for external.

2. Linking out takes away from the pr you can send to other pages no matter who you link to.

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by janeth

WHat?



1. There is only one pr, there is not one for internal and one for external.

2. Linking out takes away from the pr you can send to other pages no matter who you link to.

-------------------

Ok, finally, i am glad that at least you understand what i mean! The way you think was my knowlage some time ago, but i have changed my mind and better say obtained more! That is my knowlage and you may disagree with it, its your own choice. So let us leave things as they are (our knowlage as it is).

P.S. Confucius said... When in a hole, stop digging!! I would add one thing: When on the surface, start digging you will get knowlage!!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

-------------------

Ok, finally, i am glad that at least you understand what i mean! The way you think was my knowlage some time ago, but i have changed my mind and better say obtained more! That is my knowlage and you may disagree with it, its your own choice. So let us leave things as they are (our knowlage as it is).

P.S. Confucius said... When in a hole, stop digging!! I would add one thing: When on the surface, start digging you will get knowlage!!

It's fine to think differently however, when on a public forum and posting something no one has heard of before it’s a good idea to post proof. And if you don’t have any then you can’t blame people for thinking, leaning towards or believing something that has been proven, tested and tried.

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by janeth

It's fine to think differently however, when on a public forum and posting something no one has heard of before it’s a good idea to post proof. And if you don’t have any then you can’t blame people for thinking, leaning towards or believing something that has been proven, tested and tried.

The proof for you guys would be Matt Cutts himself speaking the same way! I am not him, so of course you would disagree.
Let me just ask you two questions:
1. Do you have YOUR proof that you lose your PR when linking out? (References to other forums, blog posts is not YOUR proof!!)
2. Have you ever lost your search engine positions because of linking out?

My answer to the 2nd question would be: I never lost anything by linking out whenever i tried using dofollow, nofollow, 2 links, 5 links, 15 links. I had my PR mostly dependant on INBOUND links and little on internal linking structure. But never on outbound linking!! I have 12 websites monitored by me and my co-workers, some sites were launched in 2004, some later, some just recentely! We have collected enough data to claim that i am right!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

The proof for you guys would be Matt Cutts himself speaking the same way!

And the link?

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

1. Do you have YOUR proof that you lose your PR when linking out? (References to other forums, blog posts is not YOUR proof!!)

It takes a rather large site to get the results that you are talking about. However, the first part of last year we did some testing and removed all outgoing links on a couple of the most linked to pages on one of our sites and got one of the other pages to move up in ranking.

We then replaced the links and the site went back to its original position. With that being said it should be fairly easy to find article and test throughout the internet on page sculpting.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

2. Have you ever lost your search engine positions because of linking out?

Yes, And in some cases we totally disappeared. It was one of the reasons we first started playing with the links.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

The proof for you guys would be Matt Cutts himself speaking the same way! I am not him, so of course you would disagree.
Let me just ask you two questions:
1. Do you have YOUR proof that you lose your PR when linking out? (References to other forums, blog posts is not YOUR proof!!)
2. Have you ever lost your search engine positions because of linking out?

You need to learn to read what is being posted.

First... Nobody has posted that you lose your PR when linking out. Quite the contrary. I clearly posted back on page 1...

PR leak is a very specific and narrow. All it refers to is the amount of PR that is passed (voted) to an external page. No more, no less. The result can be positive, negative, or neutral depending upon where it is passed (voted).

What part of that do you not understand?

As for your second question... Nobody has suggested anything of the sort and that was not what the OP was asking. They were asking ... "What is Google PR leaking?"

You've been posting unfounded nonsense Dimitry. Not only unfounded but clearly misleading.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

My answer to the 2nd question would be: I never lost anything by linking out whenever i tried using dofollow, nofollow, 2 links, 5 links, 15 links. I had my PR mostely dependant on INBOUND links and little on internal linking structure. But never on outbound linking!! I have 12 websites monitored by me and my co-workers, some sites were launched in 2004, some later, some just recentely! We have collected enough data to claim i am right!

Utter nonsense.

Based upon your statement you clearly don't have a clue about internal linking.

Think your PR is dependant on inbound links from external sites and not internal linking? Remove all your links to internal pages and watch what happens.

Finally, I don't care how much data you "claim" to have collected. Since you do not know what your PR actually is, how much PR is actually available to be passed (voted), how that PR is actually divided among the links, you can claim nothing in that regard.

Dave

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Think your PR is dependant on inbound links from external sites and not internal linking? Remove all your links to internal pages and watch what happens.

Dave

Dave, you quoted me but didn't read! Here is what you quated from my last post "I had my PR mostly dependant on INBOUND links and little on internal linking structure." This one "and little on internal linking structure" that means that sure enough it is dependant, but "little"! Less than on indound links from external sites! Come on Dave you still do not understand what i am saying or you just don't read carefully!!

As for "what is PR leaking" I already stated that there is no such a term and i doubt it exists! All that i have explained here in this thread is that there is no PR leak but there is a PR flow (internal and external) And my main point is that they do not interact!

Janeth did understand me correctly and i accept it that she does not agree! David, i can clearly see now that you didn't understand me!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

As for "what is PR leaking" I already stated that there is no such a term and i doubt it exists!

And you said this is what Matt Cutts also said but never would show proof of that or any other kind of proof.

Then you said there were two flows of pr internal and external (with no proof of either) however, I have to wonder why there needs to be two flows if there is no leakage.

[Russianzio12]

For example, there are two PR5 sites linking to each other the 1st PR5 has only the link to the 2nd PR5, on its turn the 2nd PR5 has other 5 outbound links. You state, Dave that there is a PR leak here and the 1st site loses! In your understanding the 1st site should,t link to the 2nd!

The fact is that both sites gain PR, the only thing that the 1st one gets less PR as th 2nd one has more outbound links!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

For example, there are two PR5 sites linking to each other the 1st PR5 has only the link to the 2nd PR5, on its turn the 2nd PR5 has other 5 outbound links. You state, Dave that there is a PR leak here and the 1st site loses! In your understanding the 1st site should,t link to the 2nd!

The fact is that both sites gain PR, the only thing that the 1st one gets less PR as th 2nd one has more outbound links!

Site A has a pr5 and a topic about silicone wristbands. On that page it has 10 internal links and in those links one of the links go to a page about custom silicone wristbands and is currently ranking #1 for custom silicone wristbands.

The site owner learns from SEO’s that linking out to authority sites will increase his ranking so he links out to 300 authority sites. He is surprised to learn that not only did his ranking not increase but he no longer ranks #1 for custom silicone wristbands.

He’s not touched the custom silicone wristband page, so what happened?

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by janeth

And you said this is what Matt Cutts also said but never would show proof of that or any other kind of proof.

He didn't say that! I meant he is the only proof for you and you wouldn't listen to anyone else! Its like "How can i believe that the Earth is round if the bible doesn't say so"
My original sentence:
"The proof for you guys would be Matt Cutts himself speaking the same way! I am not him, so of course you would disagree."

I do not like it when people are blind and bible-stuck and do not have their own studies!

Can you compare tests on 12 sites to one of yours! Ok you tested it, but there are so many other factors, moreover, you would never dissapear from search unless you have strong reasons that would make Google believe you are blackhat!

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by janeth

Site A has a pr5 and a topic about silicone wristbands. On that page it has 10 internal links and in those links one of the links go to a page about custom silicone wristbands and is currently ranking #1 for custom silicone wristbands.

The site owner learns from SEO’s that linking out to authority sites will increase his ranking so he links out to 300 authority sites. He is surprised to learn that not only did his ranking not increase but he no longer ranks #1 for custom silicone wristbands.

He’s not touched the custom silicone wristband page, so what happened?

I never said you gain PR nor get better ranking by linking out!!! I said you don't lose it unless you link to 20 or more, 300 links out It clearly tells Google of a link farm.

If he links to 5 good sites he is ok!

There is always a "Golden middle rule" it applies everywhere. Do not exagerate and you wouldn't get hurt!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

He didn't say that! I meant he is the only proof for you and you wouldn't listen to anyone else!

He’s being Google’s head engineer and all I just felt maybe we ought to listen to what he has to say and it is in line with what I believe as well as thousands of other people. Changing over to your side (where you stand all alone with no proof and it is different from what I and thousands of other believe) seems less promising.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Its like "How can i believe that the Earth is round if the bible doesn't say so"

Had the Bible been nothing more than a book about the shape of the world then we might have to rethink some things.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I do not like it when people are blind and bible-stuck and do not have their own studies!

Nor do I and you've been asked to show something many times but have shown nothing.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Can you compare tests on 12 sites to one of yours! Ok you tested it, but there are so many other factors, moreover, you would never dissapear from search unless you have strong reasons that would make Google believe you are blackhat!

lol, Once again we disagree.

[Russianzio12]

As i said it on the first page of this thread, Matt doesn't say it all to you OMG Didn't you know that! What he says is all you know! Nice one!

I am telling my proof but you don't read.
Taken from above:
"I never lost anything by linking out whenever i tried using dofollow, nofollow, 2 links, 5 links, 15 links. I had my PR mostly dependant on INBOUND links and little on internal linking structure. But never on outbound linking!! I have 12 websites monitored by me and my co-workers, some sites were launched in 2004, some later, some just recentely! We have collected enough data to claim that i am right!"

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

As i said it on the first page of this thread, Matt doesn't say it all to you OMG Didn't you know that! What he says is all you know! Nice one!

And how old are you?

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I am telling my proof but you don't read.

You've not shown any. To say you have proof and show nothing is nothing.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Taken from above:
"I never lost anything by linking out whenever i tried using dofollow, nofollow, 2 links, 5 links, 15 links. I had my PR mostly dependant on INBOUND links and little on internal linking structure. But never on outbound linking!! I have 12 websites monitored by me and my co-workers, some sites were launched in 2004, some later, some just recentely! We have collected enough data to claim that i am right!"

Show me the proof. I once flew therefore I can fly.

Now you know I can fly because I showed you the proof.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I do not like it when people are blind and bible-stuck and do not have their own studies!

Where is your study?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

you would never dissapear from search unless you have strong reasons that would make Google believe you are blackhat!

If youtube decided they liked an article I wrote and linked to it from their home page and that one link caused me to rank #1 for that keyword as well as giving a boost to every page on my site due to the link juice increase from the pr they were sending me.
Now they remove the link.

According to you my ranking would not drop but would stay the same.

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by janeth

If youtube decided they liked an article I wrote and linked to it from their home page and that one link caused me to rank #1 for that keyword as well as giving a boost to every page on my site due to the link juice increase from the pr they were sending me.
Now they remove the link.

According to you my ranking would not drop but would stay the same.

Thats clear enough, you lost a good inbound link and you will lose your position soon (i'd give it 2-3 weeks)! BUT you would not lose it still having that link and linking back from your site! Youtube wouldn't lose its rank because of your site either!!!!!!

Taken from my previous post as you guys don't read and i keep reposting my words

"I am sure you do have 90% of your valuable knowlage of SEO that you wouldn't share with anyone, you can breefly state one thing but never go into details! We do not share info in details just like Google doesn't. If they told you all about the algo, the whole Google empire would collapse!!! "

I will never reveal my keywords, positions and other company profiles!! I am not dumn and moreover not allowed to do that according to our tirms.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Dave, you quoted me but didn't read! Here is what you quated from my last post "I had my PR mostly dependant on INBOUND links and little on internal linking structure." This one "and little on internal linking structure" that means that sure enough it is dependant, but "little"! Less than on indound links from external sites! Come on Dave you still do not understand what i am saying or you just don't read carefully!!

I read exactly what you posted. It, and this is nonsense. You are the one who lacks understanding not I.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

As for "what is PR leaking" I already stated that there is no such a term and i doubt it exists!

More nonsense. You still do not understand what a PR Leak is. My posts explained what it is in the simplest of terms. Instead of spouting nonsense, try to go back and understand the very basic concept.

Dave

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

For example, there are two PR5 sites linking to each other the 1st PR5 has only the link to the 2nd PR5, on its turn the 2nd PR5 has other 5 outbound links. You state, Dave that there is a PR leak here and the 1st site loses! In your understanding the 1st site should,t link to the 2nd!

The fact is that both sites gain PR, the only thing that the 1st one gets less PR as th 2nd one has more outbound links!

Dimitry you are so very confused. Instead of posting nonsense, ask about what you don't understand.

A PR Leak happens when a site does not pass (vote) all of it's available PR to itself. The amount of PR that is not passed (voted) to itself is considered to have been leaked.

This is first grade math Dimitry. Very basic concept.

Dave

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by crankydave

I read exactly what you posted. It, and this is nonsense. You are the one who lacks understanding not I.

More nonsense. You still do not understand what a PR Leak is. My posts explained what it is in the simplest of terms. Instead of spouting nonsense, try to go back and understand the very basic concept.

Dave

All that you disagree with is nonsense for you. Well, i have it all here! The "basic concept" is not enough for me, you may stick to it if you wish. Take Janeth example with Youtube linking to her site one way! Your concept is that Youtube leaked its PR invane (does not pass (vote) all of it's available PR to itself) not recieving anything in return! Poor Youtube, it lost its PR and rankings just now-- your words "A PR Leak happens when a site does not pass (vote) all of it's available PR to itself". Yeah, clear enough it leaked to Janeth LOL

Dave, please tell me what you don't understand as all is clear for me!

[Russianzio12]

So, what happened with Youtube in reality is: It lost some of its available PR that could be passed to other external sites but it didn't lose anything for its internal pages! Thats about it, A basic concept!

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Your concept is that Youtube leaked its PR invane (does not pass (vote) all of it's available PR to itself) not recieving anything in return!

No it is not Dimitry. I suggested you go go back and read. Clearly you didn't. Clearly you don't understand.

For the 3rd time, here's what I posted back on page 1...

PR leak is a very specific and narrow. All it refers to is the amount of PR that is passed (voted) to an external page. No more, no less. The result can be positive, negative, or neutral depending upon where it is passed (voted).

When it comes to a PR leak, quality has nothing to do with the fact that any link to an external page is considered to have "leaked" PR. The concept is a very basic one. Any amount of PR that is passed (voted) to an external page is considered "leaked" because it cannot be passed internally no matter where it is passed (voted).

Quality comes into play after the fact. After the PR is leaked. Because depending upon "where" it is passed (voted) the end result can be positive, negative, or neutral. Basic examples strictly from a PR standpoint...

Positive end result... You link to page, that links to a page, that links to page, etc., etc., that links back to you, passing (voting) you more PR than you passed (voted) with the external link.

Negative end result... You link to page, that links to a page, that links to page, etc., etc., that links back to you, passing (voting) you less PR than you passed (voted) with the external link.

Neutral end result... You link to page, that links to a page, that links to page, etc., etc., that links back to you, passing (voting) you the same PR that you passed (voted) with the external link.

Dave

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Not it is not Dimitry. I suggested you go go back and read. Clearly you didn't. Clearly you don't understand.

For the 3rd time, here's what I posted...

Dave

Here is what you said:
"Negative end result... You link to page, that links to a page, that links to page, etc., etc., that links back to you, passing (voting) you less PR than you passed (voted) with the external link."

So what is negative here, Dave? I see it only in "unequal trade" But it is still positive, as your site still gets some PR!

I read it a long time ago!! NONSENSE!!!

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Here is what you said:
"Negative end result... You link to page, that links to a page, that links to page, etc., etc., that links back to you, passing (voting) you less PR than you passed (voted) with the external link."

So what is negative here, Dave? I see it only in "unequal trade" But it is still positive, as your site still gets some PR!

I read it a long time ago!! NONSENSE!!!

Dimitry...

You get less PR than you passed (voted) out. That is a negative result from a PR standpoint.

Tell you what Dimitry... Since you believe anything you get in return is still "positive", give me $100 and in return I'll give you $20. That's a positive result for you right?

Dave

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Dimitry...

You get less PR than you passed (voted) out. That is a negative result from a PR standpoint.

Tell you what Dimitry... Since you believe anything you get in return is still "positive", give me $100 and in return I'll give you $20. That's a positive result for you right?

Dave

My dear Lord!! Dave??? Its not as simple as your example!! Have you done any research on your own?
You do not give $100 and take $20 in return! The external linking works as votes! When you vote for your president you don't lose your house!!! When you express your vote, you don't have more votes for other candidates, thats all!
PR flow works like this for external linking! Internal linking can be compared with $$$ that you spend around your own site!

Google needs votes for other sites to determine and hold the whole BIG concept of Google! It will not damage you for showing other quality related sites! If your concept was right, noone would link out! This one is against Google structure!!

And when you consider one way links as giving out your own earned money, you are wrong big time!!

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Do you mean you understand less, or you disagree more?

Like my mathematics professor used to say:

Now I am even more confused but on a higher level

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

My dear Lord!! Dave??? Its not as simple as your example!! Have you done any research on your own?

Yes it is, and yes I have. When you you "give" more that you "get" in return, it is a "negative" result.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

You do not give $100 and take $20 in return!

Then why in the world, strictly from a PR perspective, would you call "giving" more PR than you "get" in return a "positive" thing?

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

When you express your vote, you don't have more votes for other candidates, thats all!

Are you finally starting to get it? That's correct, when you express your vote (pass PR) you don't have more (PR) for other candidates... INCLUDING YOURSELF! That's a PR Leak. What happens AFTER the leak depends.

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

PR flow works like this for external linking! Internal linking can be compared with $$$ that you spend around your own site!

<sigh> And I thought you might be starting to get it. You have ONE SUM OF MONEY. You can spend it all on yourself, spend part on yourself and part on someone else, or all on someone else. Any amount of money you spend on someone else, YOU CAN"T SPEND ON YOURSELF!!!

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Google needs votes for other sites to determine and hold the whole BIG concept of Google! It will not damage you for showing other quality related sites! If your concept was right, noone would link out! This one is against Google structure!!

What part of...

The end result can be positive, negative, or neutral depending upon where it is passed (voted).

... can't you understand?

Dave

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Yes it is, and yes I have. When you you "give" more that you "get" in return, it is a "negative" result.



Then why in the world, strictly from a PR perspective, would you call "giving" more PR than you "get" in return a "positive" thing?



Are you finally starting to get it? That's correct, when you express your vote (pass PR) you don't have more (PR) for other candidates... INCLUDING YOURSELF! That's a PR Leak. What happens AFTER the leak depends.



<sigh> And I thought you might be starting to get it. You have ONE SUM OF MONEY. You can spend it all on yourself, spend part on yourself and part on someone else, or all on someone else. Any amount of money you spend on someone else, YOU CAN"T SPEND ON YOURSELF!!!



What part of...

The end result can be positive, negative, or neutral depending upon where it is passed (voted).

... can't you understand?

Dave

Ha ha ha Dave... What is this you wrote here again? The post #128 makes a bottomline here in this thread and beats it all and your further comments look like "bla bla, you don't get it, you don't understand" By the quoted coment above I do understand that you are lost as never before and start doubting if you are actualy right by defending with a baloon against a tank! You see how much less credit you statements have? I am even more dissapointed that it has become a 3 person talk, and i didn't see a SEO pro here I will leave this thread as there is nothing more but useless stuff for me and see what else people talk about here on webworld!

[kevsta]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

Ha ha ha Dave... What is this you wrote here again? The post #128 makes a bottomline here in this thread and beats it all and your further comments look like "bla bla, you don't get it, you don't understand" By the quoted coment above I do understand that you are lost as never before and start doubting if you are actualy right by defending with a baloon against a tank! You see how much less credit you statements have? I am even more dissapointed that it has become a 3 person talk, and i didn't see a SEO pro here I will leave this thread as there is nothing more but useless stuff for me and see what else people talk about here on webworld!

i'd have to say it's starting to look like you're not ever going to learn anything here

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by kevsta

i'd have to say it's starting to look like you're not ever going to learn anything here

I am not here to learn, pal, i was a nube so many years ago when i went to forums to learn Share experience, thats what sounds better! You can continue here instead of me, give'em something to learn

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by kevsta

i'd have to say it's starting to look like you're not ever going to learn anything here

Exactly. You can lead a horse to water, you can even hold their head under the water, some just refuse to drink.

Dave

[kgun]

Originally Posted by holy2050

help:What is Google PR leaking?

Originally Posted by kgun

So this No Follow Tag | Internal Use of No Follow Tag article is misleading?

Sum up. Where is that article misleading?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

Sum up. Where is that article misleading?

I was mistaken, it's not.

[kevsta]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I am not here to learn, pal, i was a nube so many years ago when i went to forums to learn Share experience, thats what sounds better! You can continue here instead of me, give'em something to learn

this is incredibly arrogant. I run a pro SEO company with 50+ clients now, and I still learn things nearly every day.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I am not here to learn, pal,

I believe you, because if you were common sense would have kicked about 2 pages back.

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by kevsta

this is incredibly arrogant. I run a pro SEO company with 50+ clients now, and I still learn things nearly every day.

I am glad for you that you have 50 clients, but i am sad for them!! Tell your clients you learn from forums! And Let them know what you learned today? Oh, so unprofessional! There are so many SEO companies like yours spamming everywhere! Its your type of SEO companies e-mailing me every day trying to buy links from my sites. I tell them all the time that ""I DO NOT sell links and you keep insisting!! May be you guys should do something useful and study SEO and make those sites interesting for people, that will be promotion! I get spam on my mail from SEO companies that don't even speak good English. And here you are on my back trying to teach me!!

[Russianzio12]

Originally Posted by janeth

I believe you, because if you were common sense would have kicked about 2 pages back.

I don't speak spanish, Janeth and you don't spek English well, so we can not talk to each other, right? I understood that on the 1st page!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I don't speak spanish, Janeth and you don't spek English well, so we can not talk to each other, right? I understood that on the 1st page!

My English is just fine, it's you that seems to lack and understanding of you're own language.

[kevsta]

Originally Posted by Russianzio12

I am glad for you that you have 50 clients, but i am sad for them!! Tell your clients you learn from forums! And Let them know what you learned today? Oh, so unprofessional! There are so many SEO companies like yours spamming everywhere! Its your type of SEO companies e-mailing me every day trying to buy links from my sites. I tell them all the time that ""I DO NOT sell links and you keep insisting!! May be you guys should do something useful and study SEO and make those sites interesting for people, that will be promotion! I get spam on my mail from SEO companies that don't even speak good English. And here you are on my back trying to teach me!!

i cant even be bothered to answer this nonsense, you should run an SEO training school, you clearly know all there is to know

450 algo Google updates per year and you know it all already. if this wasnt so comical it would be sad.

you're not even a good troll, youre far too obvious

[crankydave]

That's quite enough.

Dave

[kevsta]

lol. sorry he provoked me..