Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekka  Mario
I think he built his site in flash, so about all he'd have on a good day is meta tags ... bots cant read flash content.
PR rank is unusual. Over here I experience the opposite Mario. I have sites with bugger all content, bugger all inbound links etc beating me out of PR rank ... doesn't make sense.
We pull those sites apart and scratch our heads, it appears Googles emphasis on PR rank out weighs other decent web content ... that's my personal experience.
I wont put those website URL's here as they dont deserve the link!
I'm in the middle of doing a test on one of my other sites, focusing on page rank to see what it does.
Mario, the way Google does it is a unusual and a mystery, however what we dont know is what weighting is given to PR compared to all the other things. You have many ezines, blogs and forum links all over the place ... highly likely the influence PR plays on your site is minimal and even if some-one has a larger PR they wont jump ahead due to the other advantages you have.
Another important factor to ranking is where your host is. For example my sites are hosted on a USA server but I'm targeting Brisbane ... this is a major negative but to host here is way expensive, so again Google makes it harder for me thinking I'm in the USA and puts crap sites in front.
Google was also to give low credit to non related site links. For example, a site on pottery linking to a tree site carries less weight than a site on rose pruning and so on. Driven off keywords the probability of the pottery site mentioning trees or pruning is zero compared to the other. Once again though a competing site to mine is in front purely because of high PR from unrelated web master building sites.
Google certainly has it's problems, it certainly has it's inconsistencies, and it certainly is an unknown animal to some degree as to how it friggin works for SEO and Webmasters ....
.... I continually monitor and tweak my site but some of the BS I see get in front is a joke. Like I said I wont list them here as it gives them links. |
I'm not sure how to use the right words to really convey the way I percieve this. But the PageRank is assigned for some reason. And whatever it is, someone, somewhere, could duplicate why a site ranks high, if they could figure out what it was.
In that case, it would be irrelevant what you page rank was previously - your only goal would be trying to duplicate what gave the other site the advantage.
We could make that change if we could figure it out, but if Google changed its programming next time around, both our sites and the one we "copy-catted" could both drop like a brick - in which case again, the PageRank is irrelevant for us.
I think that Google lends weight to .org site in our area, that could only be matched by going .org And I think that if a website says "official site" in it and other backlink descriptions also say "official site" that that has an effect - seems sensible really. What better site than the "official site" ??
From seeing some very old sites rank high for no apparent reason, I think that SEOs are right that say "age" has a good part in it. If that's true, then there is nothing we can do to artificially age our sites, which means that PageRank is irrelevant.
So it seems that every angle I look at, says that PageRank means there is something hidden behind the PageRank, and no way tells us what feature or features about the other site makes it have that number.