Status
Not open for further replies.

RedCardinal

New Member
I asked how a site could have a PageRank of 4 or 5 with rubbish links - not from Adobe or HP .... that was the basis and context for my argument.

Having a PR6/7 from a link from Adobe etc makes sense.
A few reasons:
1. Google shows bull****
2. maybe there are backlinks you cant see
3. maybe it previosly had more backlinks, and google hasn't cleared the PR cache yet

Also what makes a link rubbish? You're always working with incomplete information, you'll never know what Google knows.

When all else fails I'll fall back to 1. above:

See http://www.redcardinal.ie/google/26-10-2007/google-pagerank-export-lies/ for my previous views on TBPR. That's from over a year ago.
 

link8r

New Member
SiteA = entertainment site
SiteB = car hire site
SiteC = music site

Link#1 (C->A) relevant
Link#2 (C->B) not relevant

Google likely filters out link value by the relevance between linking and target sites.
Therefore you've established a relevance between the content on SiteB and SiteC therefore making the link not relevant. So the content of SiteB affects the value of its link therefore it's PR ?

Also what makes a link rubbish? You're always working with incomplete information, you'll never know what Google knows.
If you have a client and you've setup their domain - its not a big step in logic to know that nobody is linking to them - ok, its not as common now as it used to be, but people dont get lots of quality high-PR links for free.


1. Google shows bull****
Then you have no source for any of your points too? unless you read it somewhere or saw the effects of something you did? If you have 50 websites and you repeat the same 20/30 steps and you get a measurable increase in SERP/Traffic, do you then dismiss your own work and thank hidden backlinks that you didn't create? :p
 

RedCardinal

New Member
Therefore you've established a relevance between the content on SiteB and SiteC therefore making the link not relevant. So the content of SiteB affects the value of its link therefore it's PR ?
What I'm saying is that Google likely doesn't include all links in its link graph. Take from that what you will.
If you have a client and you've setup their domain - its not a big step in logic to know that nobody is linking to them - ok, its not as common now as it used to be, but people dont get lots of quality high-PR links for free.
Maybe Google is just playing with you then?
Then you have no source for any of your points too? unless you read it somewhere or saw the effects of something you did? If you have 50 websites and you repeat the same 20/30 steps and you get a measurable increase in SERP/Traffic, do you then dismiss your own work and thank hidden backlinks that you didn't create? :p
I've no idea what you're trying to say, so I think I'll leave it at that for now.
 

link8r

New Member
I think you could sum up whats been said here with

1. SERPs matter (me, blacknight, most SEO's) - TBPR doesn't (RedC, I agree)
2. TBPR is only a scaled down representation/snapshot that is exported every few months and you shouldn't worry about it (RedC, Matt Cutts etc)
3. Backlinks (which are the primary driver of PR) are only relevant if the site it's coming from is relevant, the quality of the site its coming from, where its placed on the site etc....

Hopefully that wraps it off :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Award-winning Mac antivirus and Internet security software
Top