Google's Broken Heart: PageRank Under Attack

[Garrett]

"The heart of our software is PageRank." This quote, from Google's PageRank description page, contradicts opinions and hypothesis posted on forums, blogs and articles around the web. One search developer even called PageRank "a silly idea in practice." Evidence points to Google not using "classic PageRank" in their algorithm at all these days, and many consider it all but dead (http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/17636.htm).

So what's really happening under the hood of the most searched engine?

First let's take a look at some of the assembled evidence that points to the possible abandonment of Google's classic "system for ranking web pages."

Daniel Brandt, Google-Watch (http://www.google-watch.org) creator, pointed out that the monthly crawl update cycle, which he believes was related to PageRank, "stopped 12 months ago."

"This crawling pattern," he said, "characterized Google from at least 2000 to April, 2003, but it hasn't happened that way for the last 12 months."

Another indicator that "classic PageRank" is no longer a part of Google's algorithm is, "in the last year there has been much more emphasis on, and rapid turn-around for, fresh content. Anything that is fresh cannot be assigned an accurate PageRank, because for the classic PageRank formula, the entire web has to be calculated at the same point in time."

Brandt also mentioned that, "the toolbar has been showing somewhat erratic PageRank values for the last year. The backlinks shown by Google have also been erratic. There is very little consistency between the number of backlinks shown and the PageRank value shown on the toolbar."

"The phenomenon of Google bombing," said Brandt, "shows that anchor text in links is much more important than the mere fact of a link itself. The classic PageRank formula had nothing to do with either page content or anchor text. It was a score that was precomputed, and available before the content of the page or anchor text was even considered."

Fathom, a well established SEO contributor to forums around the web, said, "to see 'value' in any attribute, technique or tactic you simply cannot look at any individiual components and say 'that one works' and use that one to gain advantage, that's simply foolish and PageRank Development fits in this category."

Matt Wells, former Infoseek developer and creator of the Gigiblast (http://www.gigiblast.com) search engine (profiled here (http://searchenginewatch.com/searchday/article.php/3080321)) is not at all impressed with PageRank (http://www.acmqueue.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=135&page=4).

"...It doesn't work. Well, it works, but no better than the simple link and link text analysis methods employed by the other engines. I know this because we implemented our own version at Infoseek and didn't see a whole lot of difference."

Wells further discouted the value of PageRank to Google's success: "I do not think Google's success is due that much to its PageRank algorithm. It certainly touts that as a big deal, but it's really just marketing hype."

He also claimed PageRank didn't even start with Google: "the idea predated Google in IBM's CLEVER project [a search engine developed at the IBM Almaden Computer Science Research Center], so it's not even Google's, after all."

"PageRank," Matt concluded, "is just a silly idea in practice, but it is beautiful mathematically. ...and because it is so much work, Google appears not to be updating its PageRank values that much."

Mike Grehan, of eMarketing News (http://www.e-marketing-news.co.uk), believes PageRank is slightly outdated. "PageRank was a breakthrough idea when it was developed by Larry Page and Sergey Brin as two students back in 1997, as was Jon Kleinberg's (http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/) HITS. But search technology has moved on considerably."

Grehan, in his interview with Jon Glick, (http://www.e-marketing-news.co.uk/april_2004.html) search manager at Yahoo, also spoke on PageRank obsession. "I always wonder about this whole PageRank thing and the amount of importance that the whole search engine marketing community places on it. I have my own view of PageRank hysteria and believe that it's, perhaps, much like the story of the Emperors New Clothes. I don't use the tool bar for that purpose at all."

So if PageRank is less of a factor (or not a factor) in Google's algorithm now then how should a webmaster change his seo techniques? I'll leave you with a thought from Fathom:

"If you really want online success in Google, think about customers and how to attract them, develop for them, cater to them, and find others who share that methodology (in plain english: more 'unique' content and different approaches to display that content and linkage that extends that content 'both ways') and Google will reward you. Shortcutting this -- Google consistently won't."

If you'd like to read informed speculation about the value of PageRank in Google's algorithm please read "Weight of Pagerank? (http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?p=95758)" You can read Fathom's (http://www.spheri.ca/directories.html) complete quote there too. Thanks to Daniel Brandt (http://www.google-watch.org) for this post (http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?p=94526#94526), which got this article rolling.

[janeth]

Page rank does matter because if I have a pr8 home page and link to another page on my site with good anchor text it will rank better then someone with a pr2 site that does the same thing.

[flood6]

I would say PR has a nice side effect, too. Even if the green bar has no effect in positioning, most webmasters assume it does. Getting inbound links (which I think we can all agree does effect positioning) is a lot easier with a PR5 site than a PR1.

[janeth]

The green bar still has an effect. It is why we rank 23 for free shopping cart with just a link from the home page to the other page.

If my website was a pr1 that would not happen.

[Bizwala]

Page rank does matter because if I have a pr8 home page and link to another page on my site with good anchor text it will rank better then someone with a pr2 site that does the same thing.

Believe it or not, it doesn't matter as it once had. Today, I have multiple websites with pageranks 3-5 which are ranked top 3 in very popular keywords. And many below me with pr 5-9.

I'm not talking about the let's find keywords with high KEI and get our pages ranked for them. I'm talking about the keywords with thousands of competitors, I rank top 3 and on two or more of them at the above page ranks.

What's really cool, is the guy below me is 2 page ranks higher than me. Yet he bounces around the top 15 every day... So watching him bounce is teaching me what I shouldn't do when working SEO magic...

Interesting enough, about 3 months ago, my sites were ranked higher in pagerank (5) but not showing up for these keywords.. (dropped because of link popularity) now I'm reaping in the benefits of sticking to the basics and I couldn't be happier while I watch all the others who worked and sowed their pagerank fall below me.

-Lani

[Andilinks]

Page Rank is still important as janeth points out. I use the Google toolbar PR meter in all my searches and I find the PR info helpful though occasionally puzzling.

Those with the greatest complaints about PageRank seem to all have their own axe to grind, but those with any opinion at all probably must have some basis for the opinion. Those trying to manipulate PR or who are dissatisfied with their PR seem to be the most vocal critics. Brandt epitomizes that.

I would like the PR of my site to be better but I don't think it's unfair.

The Google algorithm continues to evolve and PR importance may be diminishing--it certainly does change. It also has it's value as a marketing device for Google. PR is good PR (PageRank is good Public Relations). :)

Andi

[stugre]

Google changes its algorithm on a regular basis, just because PR isnt a major factor right now doesnt mean it might not swing the other way tommorrow.

This month Google has updated PR twice so far (on the 7th and within the last couple of days). To say that Google isnt spidering or working as it did "of old" is also premature.

What appears to be true - at the moment - is that Google appears to be using bands of PR rather than individual PRs to effect rankings. PR 1 - 3, PR 4 - 5 and Pr 5 - 9 appear to me to be the rough order that effects SE listings in G. So anything that is PR5 or above arent going to get a rankings boost because they are 7 and their competitor is 5.

The other thing most people forget when talking about PR is that Google has tinkered with the algorithm to make sure that relevant on topic links (call it themeing if you insist) count much more. This has hurt the "PR at all costs" sites that have PR6 or above through linking to every casino/rx/pharmacy site they can find who are notorisouly easy to trade links with. However, what they would be better off with is a PR5 with half the links to their site that are on topic, with description and contained on pages that link mainly to other on topic sites (sandwiching your teddy bears for sale link on a page linking to 100 casinos really won't do you much good).

[ProfessorPrint]

Who really cares if it's part of a search algorithm or not. Why even speculate?????

While some people think it's dead, and others don't, MOST people still assume there is some value to it, because it still exists, and it still updates.
More importantly though, because it is updated from time to time, webmasters perceive it has some importance to the "value" of their site in the marketplace, and others are more likely to exchange links with a PR5-8 site than say a 3 or 4 or less.. THe more people that want to link to you, the more backlinks you will generate, the less time you will spend searching for link partners, because people will come to you, and at the end of the day, more backlinks will help your overall ranking in Google and other engines. Now don't start questioning the validity of backlinks ;)

[ronniethedodger]

The green bar still has an effect. It is why we rank 23 for free shopping cart with just a link from the home page to the other page.

If my website was a pr1 that would not happen.

That is not true (http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q=site%3Awebproworld.com+%22Free+Shopping+Cart%22&btnG=Search). You are not number 23 solely on that one link from your home page.


Page rank does matter because if I have a pr8 home page and link to another page on my site with good anchor text it will rank better then someone with a pr2 site that does the same thing.

This is an unfair comparison. Any site that has that high of a PR is usually going to outrank you any day of the week. But it is not because of the PR, usually these sites have a thousand or more pages. Usually they have a good reason for others to link to them "naturally".

A PR2 Home Page is probably one of no value to begin with, and they are doing something wrong. But it is rare to come across one of those pages in the first place. So again you are comparing mountains to mole-hills.



I would like the PR of my site to be better but I don't think it's unfair.

I don't think it is unfair either. But Google is placing some importance on your pages none-the-less. I am finding more and more of your pages showing up in some of my searches, albeit not high on the list. They are showing up by virtue of my search terms appearing on your pages in the anchor text.

You are a prime example of more outbound links than you can shake a stick at and with very little inbound links in comparison. Being in your directory is worth a mint girl, be proud of it. (thanks for the link too)


What appears to be true - at the moment - is that Google appears to be using bands of PR rather than individual PRs to effect rankings. PR 1 - 3, PR 4 - 5 and Pr 5 - 9 appear to me to be the rough order that effects SE listings in G. So anything that is PR5 or above arent going to get a rankings boost because they are 7 and their competitor is 5.

I was just going to say this too, but you beat me to it. ;0)

I look at in three groups with different breakouts. PR4 and less, PR5-7, and the elephants PR8-infinity. For the majority of us, we are in the mid-range if we have been doing our jobs right. If you are in the PR4 or lower, then you need to do some work.

[kokopoko]

I'm not talking about the let's find keywords with high KEI and get our pages ranked for them. I'm talking about the keywords with thousands of competitors, I rank top 3 and on two or more of them at the above page ranks. -Lani

I am very new, as in my sites are 3 weeks old, to this SEO. What did you do to get so high up for those keywords?

[pgmradio]

I am a little confused by all this page ranking stuff! My website: www.pgmradio.org dropped over 30 places in one week and is now holding on at about PR42. But, my subdomain http://hike.pgmradio.org went from being non-existent to PR1! Go figure...

[Andilinks]

Being in your directory is worth a mint girl...

Oh my, you made my day Ron. :)

Andi

[Ender]

What Google needs to realize is that real or imagined, the impression of PageRank creates a sense of value in the results, albeit largely in the minds of we webmasters. (I don't know any non-SEO types who fret a whole lot about it.)

The artificial chaos they keep introducing with one algorithm shift after another will sooner or later make the other engines seem more attractive, to both users and designers.

(But, as Lisa Simpson said when she found out Homer had a Trillion Dollar Bill, "Who cares?! We're Trillionaires! Let's buy dune buggies!" I imagine that's the general mindset at the Googleplex right now.)

[flashfast]

I assume this forum topic was sparked by the other, 'Matt Wells, former Infoseek developer and creator of the Gigiblast search engine (profiled here) is not at all impressed with PageRank'.

Not impressed - gee, blowing his own horn about gigiblast? Now is it GigaBlast or GigiBlast? No reference to gigiblast I could find, and no gigiblast.com found. i assume it is a typo error.

If, it is GigaBlast, why then can't you submit an URL to them? 'Temporarily disabled'? They're not sharing. Did they get a disease?

Always conjecture - what he thinks, or she thinks. I really object to these half baked comments - not in these forums - I mean the endless stream of experts claiming such things as...
'Google doesnt have the lead anymore - other search engines now have just as concise results'. It's not the point - the point is Google is still leading after all the endless claims of it being replaced. With what? By whom? Who benefits from these claims? The searcher or the searchee? i suspect the latter who keep blowing the same old tired trumpets in front of the Google walls.

I'll consider reforming my attitude to Google's position when I see MSN, Yahoo, Jeeves etc top the 25% of visits Google sends to my site. My page rank went from a 7 (when some google editor saw it years ago) to a 4. But years ago i was getting 600 people a month, and now, after a little bit of spit and polish, it fluctuates between 7,000 and 12,000 unique vistors a month. Page Rank? I'll take the visitors over page rank and webmaster opinions anyday.

Bah Humbug.

Jeremy

http://www.flashfast.com

[dfox5]

I have noticed something strange about the Google Toolbar. I have a page at http://leathernlace.topcities.com and the Google Toolbar ranks it a 3 even though the page is not even indexed. I have noticed this on other pages also.

[LinkAdage]

PR always was, and currently is, only one piece of the puzzle.

A webmaster must focus on all the metrics of their website. Traffic, PR, who's linking to you, subject matter, freshness of content, and competition all play important roles to determine the position your site gets ranked in the SERPS.

Having a strong PR is like having a great QB on your team, you still need to surround that star QB with other weapons to get the job done. (I love sports analogies).

[robl]

Pagerank makes a big difference in how often and how deep Google will index a large site.

[chachi]

At this point, I think PR is more of a motivator for SEO types and webmasters than anything else. This thread is proof of that. I don't think there is anyone out there who thinks that PR is not factored into the SERP's at all. It is easy for the Infoseek guy, and anyone else for that matter, to take shots at Google...they are on top. Remember that time Google was talking smack about Infoseek?

Exactly

[thusmann]

Fathom, a well established SEO contributor to forums around the web, said, "to see 'value' in any attribute, technique or tactic you simply cannot look at any individiual components and say 'that one works' and use that one to gain advantage, that's simply foolish and PageRank Development fits in this category."

PageRank, like Meta Tags, are only one ingredient in the mix. I do not believe that PR is excluded from the formula that determines the position of a website within the results, as it would be a waste of time and money to dedicate computing resources to updating these values if they are not used in practice.

[Mel]

I have always been of the opinion that PageRank was never the biggest part of the Google algo and in recent times seems to have even less importance algorithmically as other factors (rightly IMO) take on more of the role of defining relevancy.

But PageRank as a public relations exercise has been very successful, in particular the psuedo PageRank provided by the Google ToolBar, which for a long time was the only easily visible token of a sites importance, which perhaps accounts for the popularity of the Google toolbar.

Given this popularity and the fact that Google has more traffic than any other search engine, PageRank is still important as a promotion tool and has even achieved a considerable financial value.

As inbound links become more and more important, to the point that the webmasters are now willing to pay high prices to buy links from high PR pages, one of the primary factors used in judging the value of a link is the PR of the linking page.

Is PR important alogorithmically? No, not very; there are easier ways to high rankings than obsessing on PR, but the fact remains that PR is the factor most used in judging the value of a link, and thus is important commercially, and the veracity of a site is often judged (righly or wrongly) by the PR of the home page.

Thus we are faced with the conundrum that while PR counts for little when it comes to ranking, it is a much more powerful commercial influence.

[fathom]

Thus we are faced with the conundrum that while PR counts for little when it comes to ranking, it is a much more powerful commercial influence.

Now that is the best PageRank promotional statement I have heard yet!

Excellent Mel! :-)

[sovidiu]

From our calculations, PR has nothing to do with your web site getting listed in SERPs, this meaning that if a web site provides excellent resources on a specific topic, it will always be shown above another web site with less resources but with overflooded optimization techniques. PR seems to be the "mark of value" for persistence, given to a web site. For instance, if you create a web site with great information and add it only once to Google, you will get that nice crawling and high PR, because Google mines for datum, not for optimized web sites.

[fathom]

From our calculations, PR has nothing to do with your web site getting listed in SERPs, this meaning that if a web site provides excellent resources on a specific topic, it will always be shown above another web site with less resources but with overflooded optimization techniques.

While that's not exactly accurate, as PageRank implies "links" and links ensure being crawled therefore 1 fair link will do, but more links is more PageRank and being crawled more often.


For instance, if you create a web site with great information and add it only once to Google, you will get that nice crawling and high PR, because Google mines for datum, not for optimized web sites.

hmmm... not really. Google follows an endless supply of links and archives the data that goes along with a new link crawled... not the other way around.

Frankly ranking and crawling have nothing in common except that higher PageRank suggests more links (for weight and relevancy thus better ranks) and more path to enter the site thus crawling often.

[sovidiu]

What if I disallow googlebot to crawl my web site and receive a 5/6 PR? I have seen web site that disallowed all crawlers and yet, they had a high PageRank.

[Mel]

That is not possible Sovidu, because because PR is only calculated for pages which Google has in its index. It might be that the page was indexed prior to the prohibition in the robots.txt file/

[Mel]

From our calculations, PR has nothing to do with your web site getting listed in SERPs, this meaning that if a web site provides excellent resources on a specific topic, it will always be shown above another web site with less resources but with overflooded optimization techniques. PR seems to be the "mark of value" for persistence, given to a web site. For instance, if you create a web site with great information and add it only once to Google, you will get that nice crawling and high PR, because Google mines for datum, not for optimized web sites.

This is not quite correct Sovidu. PageRank is calculated based on the incoming links to a page, the PR of the linking page and the number of outbound links on the linking page. PR does not take into account anything on the ranked page.

[fathom]

What if I disallow googlebot to crawl my web site and receive a 5/6 PR? I have seen web site that disallowed all crawlers and yet, they had a high PageRank.

Like Mel suggests if not a single page of a website is indexed due to server-side instructions any passed PageRank from links to that website would be lost.

You can however, get a residual effect in some instances, Some examples here:

http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=18540

[sovidiu]

Interesting post. But I still consider that a web site that disallows googlebot to index it will have a PageRank. Just because a web site does not want to be indexed by Google, does not mean that its content is not resourceful.

1,000 web sites pointing to a web site that does not want to be indexed might determine Google to give it a PageRank. It's just like saying that my web page has good content, but Google is not allowed to join in the club.

[fathom]

Interesting post. But I still consider that a web site that disallows googlebot to index it will have a PageRank. Just because a web site does not want to be indexed by Google, does not mean that its content is not resourceful.

1,000 web sites pointing to a web site that does not want to be indexed might determine Google to give it a PageRank. It's just like saying that my web page has good content, but Google is not allowed to join in the club.

OK maybe we are misunderstanding you (your terminology might not be correct).

PageRank is specific to Google and only Google... there various of link popularity. Yahoo is potentially coming out with WebRank which would be specific to them only.

Page Rank... or as most call it "SERP" search engine results position is ordered ranking in the archive of a search engine (any search engine).

Being #1 or #10 for a specific term or phrase... if this is what you are referring to then Mel and myself were discussion PageRank or also known as PR.

[sovidiu]

PR actually means "Public Relations". Anyway, some of our web sites, disallowing googlebot, are on top SERPs and have a decent PageRank. Nobody says you need to index URIs to Google in order to appear in their results pages :)

[Nargule]

...My website: www.pgmradio.org dropped over 30 places in one week and is now holding on at about PR42...
PR42???

[fathom]

...some of our web sites, disallowing googlebot, are on top SERPs and have a decent PageRank. Nobody says you need to index URIs to Google in order to appear in their results pages :)

I'm confused...

1. You disallow Googlebot to "all pages" - yet the site exists and in top ranked positions "in Google" without any pages indexed???

2. So you are using "AdWords"! This is the only way I see your above statement to be partially true.

Note: if the "complete site" is not in Google the complete set of pages are "grey bar"... while it is possible that PageRank can flow from links pointing to your site (as they are indexed) if Google can't crawl it has no reference data for your site and no way to rank you.

But on the off-chance you have found something unique - please post the URL for one of these "unindexed, not crawled websites" and please provide a search string... you might be on to something.

PLEASE NOTE: your robots.txt file is incorrect:

Your

User-agent: googlebot
Disallow:

The open Disallow: allows Googlebot to visit all files - where a / would instruct Googlebot not to... you can easily check this in your logfiles... googlebot has been flying through and under your nose.

Change to this: and you can prove the fix correct - you will be gone from Google!

User-agent: googlebot
Disallow: /

[Andilinks]

PR42???

On a scale of one to ten that IS oblivion, but I took that to mean that the link was number 42 on the search page(s). A slight misinterpretation of PageRank and an easy one to make given the literal meanings.

PageRank is the patented 1-10 scale by which Google gauges the relative importance of web sites.

SERP is Search engine result position, which is what I'm sure "PR42" means here.

Andi

[Dave Hawley]

PR actually means "Public Relations". Anyway, some of our web sites, disallowing googlebot, are on top SERPs and have a decent PageRank. Nobody says you need to index URIs to Google in order to appear in their results pages :)

Nah, not so sovidiu. As Fathom has pointed out, your robot.text file is wrong that is the reason.

[sovidiu]

Ok then. What if I suggest you one thing:
- you buy a domain name and host it (if you have no hosting, I will provide you with one account from Organic.ro);
- we'll both do the info.txt, grub.txt, robots.txt and the others, disallowing googlebot;
- I will make the content in French, German, Italian, Spanish etc. (the European languages), and you will do it in English;
- you will promote it on U.S. search engines and web directories, and I will spread it across European web sites.

We'll both find out a good subject to be followed by the future web site.

...and we'll see its PageRank in three months. I bet it will be well over 5, even though it will not get crawled by Google.
Are you willing to test this new thing? :)

[Dave Hawley]

You said your pages were indexed in Google even though you had a robot.txt file to tell Google not to. The ONLY reason it is indexed is because your robot.txt file was set up wrong. Can you not see that?

There is no need for me to take up your challenge. I have pages on my site that are ONLY for paying clients. I intruct Google NOT to index them and they have NOt been indexed for over 4 years.

Set up your robot.txt file correctly and within 3 months your pages will be dropped from Google.

[sovidiu]

Sure.

[fathom]

Ok then. What if I suggest you one thing:
- you buy a domain name and host it (if you have no hosting, I will provide you with one account from Organic.ro);
- we'll both do the info.txt, grub.txt, robots.txt and the others, disallowing googlebot;
- I will make the content in French, German, Italian, Spanish etc. (the European languages), and you will do it in English;
- you will promote it on U.S. search engines and web directories, and I will spread it across European web sites.

We'll both find out a good subject to be followed by the future web site.

...and we'll see its PageRank in three months. I bet it will be well over 5, even though it will not get crawled by Google.
Are you willing to test this new thing? :)

Sure thing > I'm game... first though:


What if I disallow googlebot to crawl my web site and receive a 5/6 PR? I have seen web site that disallowed all crawlers and yet, they had a high PageRank.

You have suggested in this post that these uncrawled sites are available - please post a URL or two.

If you can show at least this much - it would be worth while to do what you have suggested. Testing a hypothesis is good - but an appreciation of current "knows" is the best place to start.

Need to see this so not to un-necessarily waste time.

[sovidiu]

Hello. I am not allowed to paste URLs testing our strategy, but it can be all synthesized to:

- creating a Web site with index,nofollow tag
- no robots.txt
- getting links to second-level pages of your web site
- compressing the site content/pages into a static URL (aka you go to example.com/about_us/ and your visitors only see the address example.com/ on their browser).

It's something like creating a Web site that only has a Flash movie. And it all makes sense, so far, just that it is a bit difficult to explain.

[fathom]

Hello. I am not allowed to paste URLs testing our strategy, but it can be all synthesized to:

- creating a Web site with index,nofollow tag
- no robots.txt
- getting links to second-level pages of your web site
- compressing the site content/pages into a static URL (aka you go to example.com/about_us/ and your visitors only see the address example.com/ on their browser).

It's something like creating a Web site that only has a Flash movie. And it all makes sense, so far, just that it is a bit difficult to explain.

Sorry sovidiu - this is pure rubbish and a waste of time.

- creating a Web site with index,nofollow tag > implies being indexed
- no robots.txt implies no instructions to Googlebot to not crawl...

I guess I was right after all! :-)

[sovidiu]

Of course you are right. But sometimes your web sites might get overrun by our own. And I don't really have to explain you the system; it would be a waste of time and I don't actually go along with that "open source information exchange".

[ronniethedodger]

Thus we are faced with the conundrum that while PR counts for little when it comes to ranking, it is a much more powerful commercial influence.

Now that is the best PageRank promotional statement I have heard yet!

Excellent Mel! :-)

I like Super Bowl commercials along with the next guy, but I don't go out and buy a six pack of Budweiser just to find out if it is "less filling or tastes great".

The only "commercial influence" there is, is over the un-informed. Every time I get a mail that starts out "Would you like to trade links with our high PR6/7 ...." it goes right into the round file and anyone else who gets these spam letters should do the same.

And if that isn't bad enough, I am now seeing requests come in from a website that uses search engine cloaking for their pages. They are scamming for links based on "invisible" PR.


I have always been of the opinion that PageRank was never the biggest part of the Google algo and in recent times seems to have even less importance algorithmically as other factors (rightly IMO) take on more of the role of defining relevancy.

Ditto. But I would like to add ....


PageRank is the patented 1-10 scale by which Google gauges the relative importance of web sites.

...that it is like the Richter Scale in comparing earth temblors. The scale is not linear and is more logrithmic. On the Richter, an 8 is ten times more powerful than a 7...which is ten times more powerful than a 6, and so on.

Once you hit a certain range in the upper echelon of a PR7...everything you publish to the web starts to turn into gold. PR8 you can make bank on it and then you start to have "commercial influence", anything less than that is a stale "Where's the beef?" commercial.

[steveteva]

Yes it's commercial but it's still technical too. Don't forget that by January of 1996, Larry and Sergey had begun collaboration on a search engine called BackRub, named for its unique ability to analyze the "back links" pointing to a given website and that has been applied to Google Page Rank.

The proof that page rank have no effect on ranking a website at top.

type keyword in Google search: software with resell rights
The number 1 site listed is a PR0 (Green Bar)
The number 2 - PR2
The number 3 - PR0
The number 4 - PR0
.....

Other website with high PR are way back.

PR=Mistery too
I ve got a website (a one page website only) with a PR5 in less then 20 days after It was online and a only 3 backlinks. So if someone can explained it, he's really an expert. (Maybe Zeal.com has the "Mojo - Austin Power stuff" of PR :-)

My website is 1toolbar.com

[Dave Hawley]

The proof that page rank have no effect on ranking a website at top.

type keyword in Google search: software with resell rights
The number 1 site listed is a PR0 (Green Bar)
The number 2 - PR2
The number 3 - PR0
The number 4 - PR0
.....

Other website with high PR are way back.


That is not proof! For one, PR is only *part* of the algo, secondly the Toolbar PR may not be the true PR and third, there is likely a lag factor when it comes to PR and rankings. In addition, as Ronnie has stated, PR is more likley to be logrithmic than linear.

Your "proof" is like me doing a search, see that pages in the top 4 have a white background and coming to the conclusion white backgrounds are more valued by Google.



PR=Mistery too
I ve got a website (a one page website only) with a PR5 in less then 20 days after It was online and a only 3 backlinks. So if someone can explained it, he's really an expert. (Maybe Zeal.com has the "Mojo - Austin Power stuff" of PR :-)

Explain what?

[steveteva]

The proof that page rank have no effect on ranking a website at top.

type keyword in Google search: software with resell rights
The number 1 site listed is a PR0 (Green Bar)
The number 2 - PR2
The number 3 - PR0
The number 4 - PR0
.....

Other website with high PR are way back.


That is not proof! For one, PR is only *part* of the algo, secondly the Toolbar PR may not be the true PR and third, there is likely a lag factor when it comes to PR and rankings. In addition, as Ronnie has stated, PR is more likley to be logrithmic than linear.

Your "proof" is like me doing a search, see that pages in the top 4 have a white background and coming to the conclusion white backgrounds are more valued by Google.



PR=Mistery too
I ve got a website (a one page website only) with a PR5 in less then 20 days after It was online and a only 3 backlinks. So if someone can explained it, he's really an expert. (Maybe Zeal.com has the "Mojo - Austin Power stuff" of PR :-)

Explain what?

The proof I was showing is what you are describing :
"PR is only *part* of the algo, secondly the Toolbar PR may not be the true PR and third, there is likely a lag factor when it comes to PR and rankings. In addition, as Ronnie has stated, PR is more likley to be logrithmic than linear."

So can you explain why I have a PR 5 (green bar) in less then 20 days with only 3 Backlinks.

[ronniethedodger]

So can you explain why I have a PR 5 (green bar) in less then 20 days with only 3 Backlinks.

That is not entirely true. You have more than just 3 backlinks pointing at that one page. And some of those links are coming from some high-powered authority sites.

I did the same thing with a site too (less than a month). It is not that hard to do. A PR5 is nothing but a drop in the barrel (well maybe two drops).

[Dave Hawley]

It's possible to get PR5 in 24 hours (or less) with only one link from the right page.

[steveteva]

[quote]
That is not entirely true. You have more than just 3 backlinks pointing at that one page. And some of those links are coming from some high-powered authority sites.



I did a link:www.mywebsite.com and it displays 3 websites linking to my website.com So how did you find other high-powered authority sites ?

What I really thinh is that the Pr has a lot to do with websites that links back to you. What did boost the green bar of PR is Zeal.com, I know that before (I don't know now) that if your website is listed in the Yahoo Directory or Dmoz, it will easely boost your pagerank as google sees that your website is important as they ve been add to these directories.
Now I might be wrong but that's how I can explain.

[ronniethedodger]

I did not use link: to see who was linking to you that is how. And I do not use just Google to verify links with ... if other SE's are onto backlinks, then you can surely bet that Google is aware of them too.

[Dave Hawley]

I'm finding that more and more that other SE are also now only showing a sample of links. SE like ATW use to show all mine, but have not for 6 months or so.

[ronniethedodger]

I am noticing that too Dave. Since that data is coming from Yahoo now, it does not surprise me. Perhaps it their version of WebRank, eh? hehehe.

MSN and HotBot are showing more in a lot of the cases, and some of the odder ones at that.

Still, from what I have seen there is no clear cut SE to go to. You have to use a combination of several to get a feel for it now. Sometimes doing straight text searches too.

[Mel]

I am seeing the most comprehensive link results now coming from Yahoo, but note that you have to use the full url with the http:// prefixed when using link: at Yahoo.

For example on one site Yahoo reports 461 links, Google reports 60 links with the link: command and 415 with the @ search.

[MarinoChick]

I know for a fact now that when you place your ads on google adwords they take your spot on the search engine rankings off. I used to advertise with google then I stopped because I lost ranking so I started again and now I am back down to 0/10. I phoned google and asked them how I can get placed on the search engine, what did I need to do, and asked if anyone was there that could tell me. His response was, ma'am we are not going to tell you how to beat Google's system. That wasn't what I was asking. Also they denied my site for adsense. It's good enough for them to make money from me though isn't it. So I emailed them and none other than Justn emailed me back. AFTER I wrote this long email explaining what had happened. He says in the email, "What is your question" WEll I am not dealing with them anymore. I feel they have signaled me out and I have contacted my attorney. I don't have to be talked to like I am an idiot, let alone be deranked after it took me almost a year and a half to get the ranking I did.

[flood6]

I know for a fact now that when you place your ads on google adwords they take your spot on the search engine rankings off. I used to advertise with google then I stopped because I lost ranking so I started again and now I am back down to 0/10. I phoned google and asked them how I can get placed on the search engine, what did I need to do, and asked if anyone was there that could tell me. His response was, ma'am we are not going to tell you how to beat Google's system. That wasn't what I was asking. Also they denied my site for adsense. It's good enough for them to make money from me though isn't it. So I emailed them and none other than Justn emailed me back. AFTER I wrote this long email explaining what had happened. He says in the email, "What is your question" WEll I am not dealing with them anymore. I feel they have signaled me out and I have contacted my attorney. I don't have to be talked to like I am an idiot, let alone be deranked after it took me almost a year and a half to get the ranking I did.

You're wrong. If things happened the way you said, something else caused the change in your Google positioning and PR.

Maybe one of the sites on your link farm (which has a PR of 1, oddly enough) got you in trouble.

[cbp]

I know for a fact now that when you place your ads on google adwords they take your spot on the search engine rankings off

Rubbish.


I phoned google and asked them how I can get placed on the search engine, what did I need to do, and asked if anyone was there that could tell me

Thats laughable. Google are NOT in the business of providing services to webmasters. They are in the business of providing search results to users, so not surprised you got no help.


they denied my site for adsense. It's good enough for them to make money from me though isn't it.

Within seconds of me looking at the URL in your profile, its obvious why you were not accepeted into Adsense. Did you read the Guidelines before you applied.

I agree with flood6 - there is so much rubbish on your links page, not surprised Google would want to rank you low.

CBP

[dfox5]

Google changes daily it seems. One of my pages at http://webpages.charter.net/dfox5/ was ranked #2 in Google search for about 2 weeks and then disappeared. The same page ranks 2 and 4 in MSN and Yahoo. I also noticed most of my other pages fell out of Google and I am begining to wonder if it has something to do with Google Ads. Is anyone else having this type of problem?

[cbp]

I am begining to wonder if it has something to do with Google Ads.

No.

CBP

[Dave Hawley]

Don, I agree with cbp. There are a few out there that insist the rankings are tied in the AdWords, but there has never been one bit of proof to back-up this claim.

Do yourself a favor and focus on getting your page ranking well, rather than joining the witch hunt.

[buddhu]

We buy ads from Google and Overture. We often rank first place in the natural Google and Yahoo SERPs for the same terms for which we buy PPC.

Discontinuing ads for certain keywords has never detectably affected our natural SERP rankings for those keywords in either engine. Equally, buying ads for new keywords has had no detectable effect on the performance of those same keywords in the natural SERPs.

On that empirical basis, IMHO PPC is PPC and natural SERPs are natural SERPs and ne'er the twain will meet (so far).

-----------------------
edited for typos

[onthink]

that works.