Google dropping PageRank?

[relixx]

I've heard rumours about the possibility of Google dropping the whole Page Rank thing as it's a false meter (with little effects on the SERPs) and people are concentrating on it too much.

Has anyone here heard this rumour and/or knows anymore about it?

If they do get rid of it, it would be funny if the PR bar suddenly went grey for every site and webmasters started panicing (something like an SEO equivalent to the Y2K hysteria?) :p

[Monolith]

I've heard rumours about the possibility of Google dropping the whole Page Rank thing as it's a false meter (with little effects on the SERPs) and people are concentrating on it too much.


If your reasoning here is sound, then that would be exactly why Google would want to keep PageRank. If to the Google data-meisters PageRank doesnt play a huge role in keyword ranking, but the whole SEO market still thinks it does, then that means Google is winning the war on spam/unnatural-ranking. False (or somewhat false) meters are exactly the kind of facade Google would want to have as a buffer between its algorithms and the public.

[aaron_nimocks]

If they would drop it I would think they would just drop it off the toolbar and never let you see what it is but still have it.

[The Webmaster]

I've heard rumours about the possibility of Google dropping the whole Page Rank thing as it's a false meter (with little effects on the SERPs) and people are concentrating on it too much.

Has anyone here heard this rumour and/or knows anymore about it?

If they do get rid of it, it would be funny if the PR bar suddenly went grey for every site and webmasters started panicing (something like an SEO equivalent to the Y2K hysteria?) :p

I have heard some rumors about it that they are planing to change it to somthing called Trust Rank. if this is true then we are about to face a whole new TR Maina Era

[Liminal]

I tend to agree with aaron_nimocks. Although, people would still publish PageRank checkers that make intellegent guesses and webmasters would turn to those sites (insted of the toolbar) to buy/sell links based on PR

[relixx]

I have heard some rumors about it that they are planing to change it to somthing called Trust Rank. if this is true then we are about to face a whole new TR Maina Era

Lol, i would prefer it to be Pigeon Rank (running on lin/ax of course...) as pigeons can't be tricked (if you have no idea what I'm on about, google pigeon rank).

Still, from a resources point of view I can see why they would want it gone. They track ur PR over the months in order to update it when the update occurs. As it means stuff-all, why waste all those resources? I mean, they could do more important things with the manpower, etc, like fixing the algo (:p)

[hajamie]

people would just look at IBLs to the sites which is pretty much the same thing.
What I don't understand is why google doesn't apply it's algo to the PageRank? (I.e. discount links which have little value, etc). This would make PR a worthy meter of a websites worth.

[just-4-teens]

if they did drop it, seeing as google like to mess with seo's etc i reckon they would give every1 a pr 10 just 4 the fun of it.

[Old Welsh Guy]

Trust rank isn't replacing Page Rank, and the page rank we see in the toolbar isn't the value they use in the Ranking algo anyhow. Trust rank is a manual seeding, a value given to a site on an individual basis. It will be ADDED to the algorithm rather than replace PR. Although logic dictates that it will impact on the PR value of a site with regard the ranking algo.

E.G. say a site has managed to link monger a pr6 but the accumulated trust rank value is only 2, then possibly this could counteract the PR value and force the site down the SERP's. A site with a PR4 however, that has been achieved with links from BBC CNN .gov sites etc might have a trustrank value of 5, which could boost the site in the SERP's, because trusted sources are 'voting' for this site, or sites that link to it.

Please note that this is all my take on how things could work rather than how things WILL work, as at this time it is all pretty much specualtion based on the limited amount of information available via releases, patents and white papers.

[jojoyohan]

I've heard the rumors a while back. I do think that googles going to replace/modify pr in the future to be a much better resource than it is now for actually ranking a page.

[Weirfire]

Trust rank isn't replacing Page Rank, and the page rank we see in the toolbar isn't the value they use in the Ranking algo anyhow. Trust rank is a manual seeding, a value given to a site on an individual basis. It will be ADDED to the algorithm rather than replace PR. Although logic dictates that it will impact on the PR value of a site with regard the ranking algo.

E.G. say a site has managed to link monger a pr6 but the accumulated trust rank value is only 2, then possibly this could counteract the PR value and force the site down the SERP's. A site with a PR4 however, that has been achieved with links from BBC CNN .gov sites etc might have a trustrank value of 5, which could boost the site in the SERP's, because trusted sources are 'voting' for this site, or sites that link to it.

Please note that this is all my take on how things could work rather than how things WILL work, as at this time it is all pretty much specualtion based on the limited amount of information available via releases, patents and white papers.

I'm not sure if this would be a viable way to produce more relevant results. Google will want to keep their search engine as automated as possible and by creating the trustrank system it involves a lot of human editing. If they can find an automated way of deciding whether a site is trustworthy or not then I think it might be something they would implement.

[Liminal]

Can someone summarize the difference between PR and TR (trsutrank)?

[Old Welsh Guy]

I'm not sure if this would be a viable way to produce more relevant results. Google will want to keep their search engine as automated as possible and by creating the trustrank system it involves a lot of human editing. If they can find an automated way of deciding whether a site is trustworthy or not then I think it might be something they would implement.


Only the initial seeding is manual, after that it is automated on a PR style basis with votes from trusted sites passing trus on (if that explanation makes sense)

[Weirfire]

Only the initial seeding is manual, after that it is automated on a PR style basis with votes from trusted sites passing trus on (if that explanation makes sense)

I understand what you are saying old fella. :)

I just feel that this could only be achieved by giving the "trust status" to the top PR sites such as say the top 1,000 PR weighted sites - human edited of course as it is possible for junk sites to get a high PR rating. After this, it starts to get a little tricky and tiresome to keep the data updated etc.

[theloans_org]

I think google will change pr, but not remove it. Why would they cancel something which is so popular and is connected with their name? PR is google's treasure.

Anyway, when few months ago PR toolbar went grey for 3 days, everyone was saying that it's the end of PR. But PR came back :) And I think it will stay with us for some time yet.

[eiso]

These rumours went around in 2004 allready when google was taking its time with the PR update.

I personally don't think they would drop it.

[Jim_Westergren]

No, they will not drop it. Almost 100% sure.

Otherwise they would for example not have a picture of the toolbar and the PR bar on it when you go to Google.se.

The PR, or in other words, the idea that all pages does not have equal value is the foundation and what made Google successful in the beginning when it was created. And if you read on the "about pages" they seem to be proud of it. But IF they would drop it, it would probably only be on the toolbar display - internally it would just as normal.

[gdtechind]

i also think, they will have something like trust rank and that would be more relevant in knowing the rankings than the page rank

[tesla]

I've heard about it, and I think it is a dumb idea for Google to drop it. If Google drops pr, what separates a five year old site from a brand new site other than traffic and backlinks?

I like pr because it gives you a ballpark idea of the quality of a site. A lot of people argue that it can be manipulated, and they are right. But their should be a way to tell the difference between a 5 year old pr 7 site and a fake pr 7 site.

Another reason Google shouldn't get rid of pr is because webmasters make money off it. Many webmasters by text links on high pr pages in order to increase their own pr and get traffic. If pr goes, then in theory the business of text links based on pr goes to.

Their just has to be a way to rank a good older site from a new site. Right now I think pr is the best way.

[Old Welsh Guy]

If you want to know how it works then here is 12 pages of PDF http://www.vldb.org/conf/2004/RS15P3.PDF

[Jim_Westergren]

If you want to know how it works then here is 12 pages of PDF http://www.vldb.org/conf/2004/RS15P3.PDF

Wow. That will be some nice study for some evenings :)

[minstrel]

Trust rank isn't replacing Page Rank, and the page rank we see in the toolbar isn't the value they use in the Ranking algo anyhow. Trust rank is a manual seeding, a value given to a site on an individual basis. It will be ADDED to the algorithm rather than replace PR. Although logic dictates that it will impact on the PR value of a site with regard the ranking algo.

E.G. say a site has managed to link monger a pr6 but the accumulated trust rank value is only 2, then possibly this could counteract the PR value and force the site down the SERP's. A site with a PR4 however, that has been achieved with links from BBC CNN .gov sites etc might have a trustrank value of 5, which could boost the site in the SERP's, because trusted sources are 'voting' for this site, or sites that link to it.

Please note that this is all my take on how things could work rather than how things WILL work, as at this time it is all pretty much specualtion based on the limited amount of information available via releases, patents and white papers.
That may just be speculation from an old bald Welsh guy but I think it's probably not far off :)

[mhamdi]

IMO TR is already included in PR calculation. but as it is presented in the paper it is the yahoo proposal for their own PR

[relixx]

Another reason Google shouldn't get rid of pr is because webmasters make money off it. Many webmasters by text links on high pr pages in order to increase their own pr and get traffic. If pr goes, then in theory the business of text links based on pr goes to.



Actually, that would be a reason for G to get rid of it, as buying links is a artifical manipulation of the SERPs...

[Bompa]

I've heard rumours about the possibility of Google dropping the whole Page Rank thing as it's a false meter (with little effects on the SERPs) and people are concentrating on it too much.


By definition, PageRank is Google's measure of the importance of a page.

It is the only thing which separates Google from the other search engines.

And, by the way, PageRank most definitely makes a difference in the SERPs, it's just not the number one factor which gets a page to the top.


Bompa

[rehash]

A page with poor PR is not even fully indexed, specially if it has many sub pages.
MSN and Yahoo also have something similar, but they don't make it public.

[Old Welsh Guy]

Yahoo webrank is public.