I don't think i've heard of a high ranking site (more-so page) with a bad quality score. (exception: links &/or spamming) They could be (technically) separate (maybe even indirect) but (imo) ultimately the goal of both is (& outcome should be) the same. - At least that we know of. Their (determining) paths could only be 'so unparallel' from each other. - in decent/good faith theory. Whether they are (+/-directly) related may make 'no difference' or be impossible to tell from the outside. Insert <Money>: A claim of 'poor quality' is possible regardless of (already existing & determined) PR. So, even if they were related it may not matter once 'cha-ching' is involved. Getting a free ride on the PR side but not in 'quality' wouldn't be surprising. Getting a 'free' ride on quality but not PR would. - doing something wrong/missing @ this point Intent could be what separates them @ the end of the code. - competition not required. There's no way to tell, but i think blindly saying 'not related' is not very insightful. - It's also what google would likely prefer you to think. .
It is in NO-WAY related, period. This isn't a guess, it comes from extensive experience with six figure adwords spending - including keywords that were highly competitive and where the site (PR6) already ranked #1 for the keyword, yet received a low-quality score.
Saying 'they aren't related' doesn't negate the similar goal they share. - Accuracy of determining quality & assigning rank. Ranking #1 for a 'highly competitive' keyword yet receiving a low-quality score could be competitor(s) outspending. - (ie, nothing to do with actual quality) (IMO) that may not prove or say anything. (IMO) If your QS is high but your PR is low it could be just a matter of links.
You should stick to buying and selling stuff on ebay for $5. Your posts ramble on like the village idiot and contribute nothing but stupid grassy knoll theories.
Show me a de-indexed site that has a great QS. Show me a penalized site that has a great QS. Show me a site that has a great QS, where the PR side says 'complete garbage' (IMO) If your site gets a good QS (reliably, for period+ of time (not short term)) - i've never seen the PR side view the site as 'crap' - slight exception: (lack of) links - of course you can spend your way to a good QS All of which still doesn't acknowledge the similar goals of both sides. How long do you think you can really claim 'different' while denying (what would have to be) the similarities?
They're not really related - having a high PR DOES NOT mean you will get a high QS, and vice-versa. PR is pretty much built around gaining PR from incoming links (obviously a few other factors but by the most important is the incoming links' PR). Digressing from the main point a bit here but if you make your page relevant to the KWs you're targeting on Adwords (KWs, title, H1s etc - which all contribute towards good SEO) then your QS will increase - essentially, optimise your page for SEO for those KWs and also target your related adwords to these pages and you'll probably end up with good QS and PR - which is what we should all be aiming for...
I agree.. .. Links Not so sure .. - Lack of links Yes - Still depends on $$ != Links --------------------- It seems Links and $$ are the "difference" (w/optimization leveling the field) .. still wouldn't summarize the sides as "different" .. What if it's basically just a swap? So.. What about everything else? ------------------------- mjewel: It seems you don't have opinions (re: insight) - just 'answers'. The original question seems to require a bit more insight vs YES or NO I don't think anyone is seeking out knee jerk reactions. I feel this is debatable. If you don't that's fine.
@ JKE: "Not so sure .." I'm pretty sure on this one. I have a number of deep pages which are grey barred and / or PR0 and have got a QS of 9 or 10 / 10 for Ad Groups pointing towards these pages. "- Still depends on $$" Not necessarily, but not totally sure what angle you're coming at with this answer here. You can optimise the site with purely on page factors (and attain some pretty good results) and this can contribute to a good QS through techniques previously mentioned - doesn't cost $$. Admittedly a good QS is mainly based on CTR - but this should be normalised to ad position and therefore cost shouldn't come into it (although Google say this they also contradict themselves too, I recently received an email from one of my Google account managers saying "Raising CPCs to the levels suggested by the system should also improve click-through rates and all-round performance of the ad group, the key factors in determining quality score." - so go figure!!!!!) To get good PR on said page you don't have to fire in links, but can use PR sculpting to direct PR from your home / main pages down to these landing pages - doesn't cost $$. Having said that, if you don't want to wait for natural links to said home page or just aren't attracting them then yeah, you'll have to pay for links - costs $$. On the same point, one thing I'm not sure of is whether these links themselves directly affect the relevance of the page with regards to Adwords - i.e. if I have 100 links with the anchor text "blue widgets" directed to a page, and a KW in adwords "blue widget" going to that page then does this affect QS?? My gut feeling would be that Google would see this as a relevancy factor and would contribute towards QS - so my answer would be that PR itself does not directly contribute towards QS, but the main factor which makes up PR probably does...
PR does not affecting QS. QS is combined keyword->ad->landing page score plus CTR of the keyword/ad and history of the ad performance (weighted average). High PR websites often has good QS not because of PR it self, but because their real value - good, relevant and optimised content. You can have QS 1 on domain with PR10 and QS 10 on domain without PR .
No.. PR does not matter as long as your site has good content & good visitor experience... which means the content should be available within 1-2 clicks.. the navigation should be clean & user should be able to locate it easily... I have done many campaigns on new domains and haven't had any issues.
PR has nothing to do with quality score. If you want to attain high QS, You need to create different adgroups for different kind of keywords and your landing page should also have keywords related to your adgroup keywords. I have also seen low QS for one page websites...