See my Addendum above, visio: The point is not that .edu and .gov sites don't often rank higher. The point is that they rank higher because more people link to them. It's not the TLD. It's the backlinks.
chowbow: These 'many seo' are nobodys because I have never seen a seo that was worth salt say that. And seo like myself, agnivo(can't vouch for ags experiance but his post is knowledgable) and others have learned you can't conquer Google by following what Matt Cutts says or even what other smart seo say but by facts, research and production. If I followed what Matt Cutts said I would still have one site. I now have over 10 that are running great. ANd plan on starting more. Most of you can't accurately give an oppinion of a .edu links worth as you never have gotten any because they are usually harder to get. But those of us who have can testify they have great worth.
Thats not true either. I have quite a few small .edu backlinks which I could see the difference as soon as they linked to me. They aren't large sites with many backlinks. They are small sites....
OK, visio. I'm still waiting for evidence. All you ever give us are "everybody knows" statements and "I tried it on two small sites so I know it's true" statements - that superstitious thinking I referred to earlier. But if you are happy continuing your little journey down the path of ignorance, you know what? I'm going to let you go on your merry little way.
Yes, visio...you are right. I seem to bump daily on people who would be pleased to declare that Matt Cutts is their "FATHER" if not more! What an akward sorta dizziness these people are in!
Matt is your prove and Aaron Wall is mine. Those are people? I thought maybe we could blame it on being UFO people or something
Average life of .gov/.edu domains are much more than .com. So, i guess those domains are much important and worth PR5++
.edu and .gov links even if the pr is 2, the link itself is worth more than PR5 compared to a regular .com website. Yes, the are valuable.
Where do you people get this garbage? Not only is this dead wrong, it's not even mathematically possible. I think you need to do a little reading on what exactly PageRank is.
Know your the one with the garbage because that is what PR is dude. Two PR4 sites even if both are .com will have vastly different trustvalues and therefore pass different amounts of importance to your site. It would not be garbage to think this also could be used with .edu sites. And I am about sick of you calling everyone elses ideas garbage. You seem to have less knowledge in seo than in balling people out.
Visio, kindly explain to the rest of the world how in your universe a PR2 site can pass PR5 to another page. To keep it simple for you, we'll even assume that's the only outgoing link from the PR2 page. I eagerly await this latest breakthrough in mathematics.
When did I say that. If you read my posts maybe it would be clearer to you. Nate said it. ANd what he meant was that a PR2 backlink can be WORTH a PR5 if it is a .edu backlink versus a .com. That doesn't mean it makes the other site a PR5. It doesn't take rocket science to figure that one out
I cannot imagine reading your posts making anything at all clearer to anyone at all. You can barely spell and when it comes to SEO you are clearly getting your knowledge second-hand from the mythology you read in forums like SEOChat.
Nice sourcing. Yeah, many SEO experts are saying that .edu and .gov backlinks are far better for your website than a .com's, but that's obvious why: .edu and .gov sites will only link to quality sites with quality content, and with the extension .edu and .gov sites are gauranteed to be spam-free: only government officials and education facilities can obtain such domains.
I think .edu and .gov sites carry more authoritive status and therefore provide more trust and therefore trustrank, which can help a site. Whether these domains would provide more or less benefit to SERP's or PR as opposed to a high PR .com and other domains - we can all only guess unless ur a Google engineer
That article is hardly proof. Walls starts off by saying his PR7 site doesn't get as good of SERPs as a PR5 site that happens to have lots of .edu links. Ok, good enough thesis, so now I expected some sort of proof. Well, the "proof" is that the public PR Google provides us isn't reliable, so how can Matt Cutts be reliable. This argument damages the original thesis as much as it helps it. Think about it. If he's admitting PR isn't reliable, then there's more than meets the eye to a PR5 vs a PR7. Then Walls go off on a tangent about how government agencies get SEO training from Google. Overall, this article proves nothing, and actually adds credence to the Matt Cutts' statements that Minstrel linked. You don't have believe everything (or anything) Cutts says, but please apply the same level of skepticism to the Aaron Walls of this world.
I usually don't read Matt Cat's articles, but logically what I read there is very true and google doesn't give any priority to links coming from gov or edu domains.