Good PR without Backlinks

[volund]

Well, Like many I have the .net to go along with my .com

I was contemplating building up backlinks and promoting the .net site using the same keywords, and then when it's ranking high, hitting it with a 301 to shoot my money site up. [/COLOR][/SIZE]

Would you not be better off with multiple sites on the first page?

 

[darshan1994]

I have a competing site that is ranking 1st with PR 4, But when checking backlinks it only has about 10 and those are not from high pr site, its from pr 0-1. I have check that the backlinks are not pointing to inner pages and he is still first.

 

[volund]

I have a competing site that is ranking 1st with PR 4, But when checking backlinks it only has about 10 and those are not from high pr site, its from pr 0-1. I have check that the backlinks are not pointing to inner pages and he is still first.

The number of links that Google shows is only a very small percentage of the actual links a sites has. They do it on purpose to keep you from doing what you just tried to do. I have a site with over 6k backlinks indexed in Google and Google shows 9 when you do a link: search. That number really does not mean anything.

 

[darshan1994]

The number of links that Google shows is only a very small percentage of the actual links a sites has. They do it on purpose to keep you from doing what you just tried to do. I have a site with over 6k backlinks indexed in Google and Google shows 9 when you do a link: search. That number really does not mean anything.

Checked with Yahoo site explorer.

 

[abaex]

No, PR is gained by incoming links, you can have a 10 year old site with no links and it will have a PR of 0.

Naaah it also matters how much visitors you got I thought?
And the age also matters - I read a lot about these factors.

And I don't know...PageRank 3 isn't much my Domain got that but just some visitors a day...
...am I doing something wrong?

 

[volund]

Naaah it also matters how much visitors you got I thought?
And the age also matters - I read a lot about these factors.

And I don't know...PageRank 3 isn't much my Domain got that but just some visitors a day...
...am I doing something wrong?

Sorry but you need to do some more reading. Page Rank is increased by the strength of your incoming links. Age and visitors have nothing to do with it at all.

Also Page Rank is separate from your search engine rankings, you can have a high PR and not rank well for any particular keywords or you can have a low PR and rank well for a lot of Keywords. Ranking is where you get your visitors not PR so PR really has nothing to do with how many visitors you get.

 

[promosirupiah]

301 example backlink: bit.ly tinyurl etc
maybe they use it

 

[abaex]

Sorry but you need to do some more reading. Page Rank is increased by the strength of your incoming links. Age and visitors have nothing to do with it at all.

Also Page Rank is separate from your search engine rankings, you can have a high PR and not rank well for any particular keywords or you can have a low PR and rank well for a lot of Keywords. Ranking is where you get your visitors not PR so PR really has nothing to do with how many visitors you get.

I thought that I actually read about that on Google itself~
When PR is seperated from the ranking of google...
...WHY should the name be "PageRANK" then??
What does the PR say if it's just about links...nothing?
And how did my website get PR3? Because I got a link from my PR6 YT?

 

[cable]

Sorry but you need to do some more reading. Page Rank is increased by the strength of your incoming links. Age and visitors have nothing to do with it at all.

Also Page Rank is separate from your search engine rankings, you can have a high PR and not rank well for any particular keywords or you can have a low PR and rank well for a lot of Keywords. Ranking is where you get your visitors not PR so PR really has nothing to do with how many visitors you get.

Hey volund,
you helped me in another thread, so I hope you can help me here, too.
If PR has nothing to do with my serp, what increases my position of serp?

Thanks!

 

[abaex]

Hey volund,
you helped me in another thread, so I hope you can help me here, too.
If PR has nothing to do with my serp, what increases my position of serp?

Thanks!

I could imagine the Header title, other Meta-Tags & content...
...BUT there are so much sites with the same Tags maybe
even the same number of visitors.
PageRank HAS something to do with ranking
at least as ONE of lots of factors. How could you be so sure
Google doesn't even tell people how they rank their sites and
wouldn't it be stupid to create something like PR without sense?

Even if PR is just there for back-links...
...aren't back-links good for the ranking too?
Why else would people try to get more links?
To get a higher PR which isn't important at all??

Sounds strange to me.

So what volun wants to say is that this blackhat backlink-building tool is good for NOTHING?
Maybe to pose arround with "I got PR8!!" buuut who would actually do that besides 12 year olds... o_0

 

[lethbridge]

...WHY should the name be "PageRANK" then??

Because it is named after Larry Page. If his name was Larry Link, it would be called LinkRank, lol.

 

[blackrain010]

Old domains can rank high with few backlinks. Sometime Google thinks domain is authority and it gets pr.

 

[volund]

Hey volund,
you helped me in another thread, so I hope you can help me here, too.
If PR has nothing to do with my serp, what increases my position of serp?

Thanks!

The number one factor in ranking for a particular keyword is having links pointing to your site with that keyword as anchor text. Now obviously not all links are created equal but the reason you seen so many people building and/or selling links is because that is what drives rankings in Google. You see all kinds of discussions about what is the best type of link building but not on whether link building in general is what is needed.

 

[volund]

I could imagine the Header title, other Meta-Tags & content...
...BUT there are so much sites with the same Tags maybe
even the same number of visitors.
PageRank HAS something to do with ranking
at least as ONE of lots of factors. How could you be so sure
Google doesn't even tell people how they rank their sites and
wouldn't it be stupid to create something like PR without sense?

Even if PR is just there for back-links...
...aren't back-links good for the ranking too?
Why else would people try to get more links?
To get a higher PR which isn't important at all??

Sounds strange to me.

So what volun wants to say is that this blackhat backlink-building tool is good for NOTHING?
Maybe to pose arround with "I got PR8!!" buuut who would actually do that besides 12 year olds... o_0

Page Rank is a general gauge of how much Google likes/trusts your site. The more sites that link to you the more trustworthy Google finds your site. So in this case the links to your site help build your PR. Any link you get no matter what the anchor text will help you build your sites PR. Now PR used to be more important than it is today, way back when it was probably the most important factor in ranking. You have to remember that Google updates their algorithm all the time and it has changed a lot from when they first came up with Page Rank.

Now for ranking for a particular keyword the links you need have to be very specific. Obviously a link to your site with the anchor text of Horse is not going to help you rank for Cars. It will help build your page/site PR but it will not help you rank for Cars. To rank well for the term Cars you need a lot of links with Cars in the anchor text. Those links will help both your PR and your search engine rankings unlike the links with Horse in them which only helps your PR.

That is why everybody tries to build as many links as possible with their keyword in the anchor text. It helps their ranking for the keyword they are targeting which is much more important than PR. A high PR site on the third page is going to make a lot less money than a low PR site on the first page. That is why we say ranking is more important than PR.

 

[ipopbb]

When I link to a new webpage from my PR8 site's homepage with a footer link or a header link (either case) it becomes an instant PR3 with a single backlink. The funny thing is that it gets a !@#$load of organic google traffic. Much more so than my PR5-6 sites with thousands of backlinks... This makes me think that PR by itself isn't a sole factor but the ratio of PR to # of backlinks or something like that might be.

Just a new crack pot theory... don't take that as fact or anything.

 

[abaex]

Ah okay~
Google updates too much! >:O

 

[jacky2002r]

"PR IS NOT DEPENDENT ON BACKLINKS"

It happened many time with me when I had no backlinks to my new websites and had a 2-3 PR on the basis on ON PAGE. Google is considering lots of factors while giving the PR to any web page. Domain Age, Website Architecture, Internal Links, Relevancy & Content. A trick for getting good PR without any hassel is to create your website with Joomla. In my experience I have always got good results with it.

Thanks,
Jacky

 

[giansim]

Ah okay~
Google updates too much! >:O

Lol! Google just keeps us guessing. =)

 

[volund]

"PR IS NOT DEPENDENT ON BACKLINKS"

It happened many time with me when I had no backlinks to my new websites and had a 2-3 PR on the basis on ON PAGE. Google is considering lots of factors while giving the PR to any web page. Domain Age, Website Architecture, Internal Links, Relevancy & Content. A trick for getting good PR without any hassel is to create your website with Joomla. In my experience I have always got good results with it.

Thanks,
Jacky

Hmmm..That flies in the face of every top seo website as well as what Google has been telling us for the last 10 plus years. It also contradicts Google's own patent on the subject (though they do not actually own the patent Stanford does)

Your anecdotal stories contradicts a lot of historical, tested, and published evidence that PR is based on backlinks. I think I will go with the consensus on this one.

You might want to look at the following links.

The first one is Matt Cutts talking about twitter pages specifically but he very clearly says that incoming links are what matters. The second one talks about lost incoming links and how they affect PR.

Then we have some pages from SEOmoz, wikipedia and other sites. The only factor that is mentioned in any of them is links. The reason for that is that is what Page Rank is based on. None of those other factors have anything at all to do with PR.

http://www.youtube.com/user/GoogleWebmasterHelp#p/c/841CB8F9F31BF5D5/145/lPgczWynzyY

http://www.youtube.com/user/GoogleWebmasterHelp#p/c/841CB8F9F31BF5D5/129/fia_1b07jCQ

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/pagerank-link-patterns-the-new-flow-of-link-juice

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-science-of-ranking-correlations

 http://www.webworkshop.net/pagerank.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank

http://www.sirgroane.net/google-page-rank/

 

[abaex]

The first one is Matt Cutts talking about twitter pages specifically but he very clearly says that incoming links are what matters.

He also really clearly says that it isn't the only factor and that this stuff will be changed in the future anyway.