285 replies to this topic

[Leann_Pass]

Page rank is a measure of links, sure it can be off but not by to much, and to tell people to unistall it and not pay it any mind is foolish...its like turning a blind eye to what little we do know about google.

What has looking at PR done for you? It hasn't been publicly updated in months....the truth is that looking at the bar is completely useless. It's pretty much like staring at a broken clock....would you do that? If you did would you know what time it was? Would your not knowing change it?

Focusing on a broken PR bar IS foolish....pretty plain and simple I think.

[ghergich]

anyhow...I hope not to get to personal in my arguments. You guys mean well and help a lot...its just sometimes I wanna scream when I see a post that says stuff like that. You guys taught me a the basics and I come here all the time and its great so no hard feelings.

[ghergich]

leann if they have not updated the algo in 3 months why would i do anything different than I did 3 months ago...to do so would be foolish plain and simple.

[Leann_Pass]

Leann.... this is the kind of thing im talking about...I mean read it...seriously what if I followed that...oh I only have 1 backlink in yahoo and google...oh well high rankings said not to worry about backlinks. (and i didnt even have to leave my own post lol) that was really hard.

"You only have limitted time to spend each day. Worrying about PageRank, worrying aboput backlinks and worrying about Google being full doesn't help anyone."

You quoted from a post made by ProjectPHP here...I would like for him to clarify if he meant NOT to link build (which I doubt) OR if he meant not to worry about what the backlink function shows you.

I understand your frustration but truly the folks here are not stupid. There have been mega discussions about what weighs more links or content and so on....there are differing views for certain BUT I have never seen anyone say links do not matter.

[Jill]

ghergich, no it's definitely not anything personal.

I really and truly think we're simply not understanding each other. You think I'm saying something I'm not, and apparently I think you're saying something you're not.

But really, like Leann said, we're just saying that since the PageRank toolbar doesn't actually work, then worrying about what it says is a waste of time.

Yes, work on backlinks. Nobody disputes that, just don't "worry" about them. Do what you can do that is in your control.

And I don't care what you say or believe, but building a great site for the long term will always be one of the best ways to ensure long-term rankings.

Is it the only way? No of course not, and I never say that it is. It's one way, and it's a good way.

[Leann_Pass]

leann if they have not updated the algo in 3 months why would i do anything different than I did 3 months ago...to do so would be foolish plain and simple.

They have indexed new sites and new pages and they are coming up in the serps. No, they have not done a major update (like they used to) but there is a rolling update.....the serps do change.

[ghergich]

cool I think we may be on the same page now.......

Now for something a little different.

I would like to prove that google is not ranking sites that are new for no other reason than that they choose to. I think this could be useful info and fun. I know its been discussed about sandbox and all before.

Here is my question, does anyone have a site that is 3 months old and is ranking highly for copetitive phrases. I am acting on the idea that google values on page content and relevant backlinks...if thats the case if a persons onpage factors are there...and the # of quality relevant links are there...they should rank. So....lets see some sites that are ranking well and are new..or lets see some sites with enough backlinks to rank...but are not...

I think google is not ranking new sites that fit what their algo wants just for the sake of Profit...but hey I guess profit is good if you a business lol

[Leann_Pass]

Here is my question, does anyone have a site that is 3 months old and is ranking highly for copetitive phrases. I am acting on the idea that google values on page content and relevant backlinks...if thats the case if a persons onpage factors are there...and the # of quality relevant links are there...they should rank. So....lets see some sites that are ranking well and are new..or lets see some sites with enough backlinks to rank...but are not...

Show me a site that ranked highly (top 10) for *truly* competitive terms in Google within 3 months of go-live EVER.

[ghergich]

I cant....but thats my point...we all know or assume that relevant backlinks and good onpage content is what ranks you....so what does google care if your site rises in link quickly, if enough people vote for you with a link you should rank. Of course Google should not value sitewides and link farms...but the algo is not that compitcated, if you have more relvant quality links and good onpage content you will out rank anyone....unless your new...soooo they must be filtering out new ppl or dropping the for no reason. Unless this had something to do with them and space like a mentioned earlier.

[mcanerin]

Blue Find

uh, I think....

But I agree in principle - the sign of a great site is people linking to it because it's a great site, not because they were paid to or are trading, etc. This takes time.

Ian

[bobmutch]

ghergich:

the reason why you do not see sites made in the last 3 months ranking highly is because they have no PR update.

In the past Google updated real PR about once a month right after they did a backlink update. We have had 4 or 5 (depending if you could July 4th as a BL update) BL updates since the last toolbar display update. I expect that the Google real PR is up to date, just they have not updated the toolbar display PR. We had a directory display PR update in Aug 10th which supports my position that real PR is being updated after each backlink update just the toolbar display PR has not been updated for whatever reason.

The PageRank algorithm doesn't have as much weight in the "over 100 things" that determine search engine results postion as it used to have, so ever if PR had not been updated for the last 3 months that is not going to matter much differences in ranking.

[Irony]

Well, I've launched a new site less than two months ago - and it is already climbing up in the SERPs (a couple of weeks ago I thought it would never happen ).

I know how you feel ghergich - I know it exactly. And I must thank you for all the talking about the "sandbox effect" - it helped me to be careful when I started my own link buiding campaign. Nothing aggressive, never in hurry - just a step by step campaign utilising various ways. 8 or 9 versions of titles, the same number of descriptions for directory submission - that makes up to 81 different combinations - and who will say it is Google bombing? Only manual submissions.

Though Google has broken its link: command, it shows my backlinks quite close to real situation - and new allinurl: shows the rest. Shoul I conclude Google likes my style?

And we bought Google Adwords without making fuss about it - we knew it would be neccessary from the start. No need to "scream" about it - just write your personal "promoting a new domain" experience down and make an article of it: SEO newbies will read it with gratitude.

Yes, PR has not been updated for 3 months. Many people haven't yet realized how useless it is - so if it has nothing to do with rankings - it certainly interferes with building credibility - but even that can be overcome.

We are in the same 0PR boat ghergich - so please do not get angry with me. It may be annoying in the start - it becomes exciting after awhile. Change your attitude - when the situation starts becoming hard to stand - joke about it. Then turn jokes into inspiration - and write something like 5 to 8 new pages for your site. That's how I'm fighting it. Or find your own way to forget about PR updates - and share it with us.

[ghergich]

interesting but you offered no proof that the new sites are rankings and I can go find tons of ppl who are sandboxed...Im sure that some sites are not effected but I know of a ton of sites being sandboxed. (why...so google makes money)

[mcanerin]

Lets draw a difference between a PR Update and a Backlink Update and a Rolling Update, shall we? It's confusing people.

PR Update - updating the server center that makes the pretty green bar move back and forth. Has an effect on SEO newbie heart rates but little else.

BL Update - updating the server center that makes the pretty link list fill up or empty out. Has an effect on SEO newbie heart rates but little else.


Rolling Update - the big one. Google not only has to check YOUR backlinks, but also those backlinks' backlinks (and so on) in order to make sure you are not in a link farm system - this takes time - usually at least one crawl (4-6 weeks) and more often 2 or 3 crawls. Until then you don't get full benifit of your backlinks.

This is the TRUE backlink and PR update, and it's ongoing, not cyclical.

Previously, Google would "estimate" your PR, relevance and authority for pages and give you a temporary score until it finished this - resulting the the infamous issue where new sites would come out of the gate ranking well and then dropping back after a month or two, thereby causing a panic...

This has been replaced by a system where new sites are no longer given the traditional boost, and actually have to wait until the backlinks have been fully analyzed, thereby causing a panic...

Ian

[ghergich]

http://web.archive.o...ww.bluefind.com bulefind is older than 3 months.