Alucard348
Registered Member
- Mar 5, 2022
- 83
- 32
Let me know what you guys think.
Link juice is what matters most, it's the power that gives importance to pages and Google ranks pages on importance.
Placement is also huge too. You don't want your links surrounded by other links(footer,nav,sidebar). You want them in content.
Formula for link juice on a page: note: links means both external and internal links pointing into the page
1) amount of inbound links * avg power of inbound links =inbound link juice
2) inbound link juice/outbound links=link juice/outbound link (there is of course some placement calculations going on here)
for ranking:
link juice*topical authority= page importance
Now, there are two unknown variables here, how do we find the power of a link and how do we find topical authority?
The true power of a link is a question I've been asking ever since I started learning about SEO, but it is a question without an answer. Nobody seems to know.
However, there are some things I do know. I know that pages that have a fuck ton of outbound links, have weaker link juice. This is why PBN sellers yell at the top of their lungs that they only have xyz outbound links.
Then, the only other factor for link juice comes from the inbound links to the page(internal linking and backlinks). So you then basically have to do equation 1 all over again until you get to the fucking source, which I have no clue about.
What came first, the chicken(link juice) or the egg(link juice)? I believe that unless Google puts an algorithmic penalty or has otherwise devalued links, all links have an average power greater than 0. This allows authority to grow.
And then the second variable is topical authority which I say comes from 2 things:
1) what Google thinks your site is about, which can come from a lot of things, most notably
a) what sites link to yours
b) the content on your site.
This is what I've got so far. Prove me wrong. Of course, I'm not fucking google so don't come at me with "oh but there's a million different signals at play." This is more framework thinking here, we're going for accuracy, not precision.
Link juice is what matters most, it's the power that gives importance to pages and Google ranks pages on importance.
Placement is also huge too. You don't want your links surrounded by other links(footer,nav,sidebar). You want them in content.
Formula for link juice on a page: note: links means both external and internal links pointing into the page
1) amount of inbound links * avg power of inbound links =inbound link juice
2) inbound link juice/outbound links=link juice/outbound link (there is of course some placement calculations going on here)
for ranking:
link juice*topical authority= page importance
Now, there are two unknown variables here, how do we find the power of a link and how do we find topical authority?
The true power of a link is a question I've been asking ever since I started learning about SEO, but it is a question without an answer. Nobody seems to know.
However, there are some things I do know. I know that pages that have a fuck ton of outbound links, have weaker link juice. This is why PBN sellers yell at the top of their lungs that they only have xyz outbound links.
Then, the only other factor for link juice comes from the inbound links to the page(internal linking and backlinks). So you then basically have to do equation 1 all over again until you get to the fucking source, which I have no clue about.
What came first, the chicken(link juice) or the egg(link juice)? I believe that unless Google puts an algorithmic penalty or has otherwise devalued links, all links have an average power greater than 0. This allows authority to grow.
And then the second variable is topical authority which I say comes from 2 things:
1) what Google thinks your site is about, which can come from a lot of things, most notably
a) what sites link to yours
b) the content on your site.
This is what I've got so far. Prove me wrong. Of course, I'm not fucking google so don't come at me with "oh but there's a million different signals at play." This is more framework thinking here, we're going for accuracy, not precision.
