According the above chart, in order to obtain a PR6 you need 3 PR7 or 15 PR7 backlinks. Am i correct in my understanding? I would like to ask how much people are generally paying for their backlinks. Does PR really influence consumer behavior or is it mainly a SEO strategy? Would u say that a good backlink strategy is the most important factor influencing SEO or is there something more important? Are backlinks from forum signatures weighted the same as backlinks from blogs or other websites (keeping PR equal) Are backlinks from different pages from the same website just the same as if you would have each backlink from a different website?
I never paid for backlinks. PR is totally overrated. It doesn't influence consumer behaviour, since the average surfer doesn't even have a toolbar to show the PR, so it's SEO only. Don't mix up backlinks and PR. Backlinks are important for your site, since link popularity and trust gained in the search engines results in better rankings. The more sites link to you with your site specific keywords, especially sites on the same topic and trusted sites, the higher the search engines will rate your relevancy for the keywords. PR is a side effect, high PR doesn't mean high ranking and even a PR0 site can rank very well for long tail keywords. PR is an indicator, since very popular and trusted sites often have high PR, but the PR itself says nothing. Links are without a doubt the most important part in SEO, onpage optimization is just a basic requirement to get the maximum effect from it. Google doesn't make a difference in where the link is, forum, blog, whatever...but I'd focus on one way link exchanges (or A->B->C triangle trades) with sites relevant for your site's topic, irrespective of PR. A link for a high quality site in your niche is always better than a from any unrelated one. Don't pick links by PR, pick them by site quality, if it's high PR, nice, but that's not all. Backlinks from different pages on the same site are not as effective as from all different domains and IPs. This doesn't mean having links from different pages on the same site is bad, but more variety is better.
IMO, PR cannot be guaranteed nowadays. Have you noticed the neverending Q3 PR thread? Speculations are endless.. PR can be taken away anytime. WE'll never know.
getting high pr is a strategy if you are selling text link but if you are targeting a higher rank, pr is not important.
This is an interesting chart. Was this taken off someone's SEO site? i would go for the backlinks, and not worry about the PR. While you can acheive a front page ranking with just onpage SEO, the back links are what will really propel you up to the #1 position.
There's no strict system for getting a PR7 site - but I wouldn't worry about it too much - just concentrate on natural ways to build links to your site - quality content is the most successful way to attract linkers. PR does have a value to people wanting to buy links on your site - but that really depends if you are selling links or not.
I would forget about that grid if i was you. First of all you don't take into account the number of outgoing links as well as current PR. PR you see now can be months out of date.
I think it would depend on the quality of the link itself, from my understanding one very high quality PR7 link, eg: from a perfectly related site that has only say 5 current outgoing links, could be enough to get you a PR6 on your site. Prices vary from free ---> $100's a month I don't think your average customer cares about PR, only on webmaster directories. Backlinks are the most important way a search engine judges the popularity and relevance of your site. Most search engines are trying to take into account the quality and relevance of those backlinks now. No one really knows for sure. Some folks simply say a backlink is a backlink and all are equal but if a search engine notices a certain type (example signature links) of link is being used to take an unfair advantage when deciding SERP's then they might partially discount the value of those links. I don't think they each count as a seperate backlinks, but again no one knows for sure and each search engine might treat these 'site-wide' links differently. I have heard of some folks that will not touch site-wides because they believe they are of lower value than single page links and I have seen the opposite. Conclusion is that buying links helps but simply buying PR with no quality content or reason for people to visit your site is probably useless in the long-term.
I suggest you shouldt not think for PR. Quality back links will help you to get better serp, and not high PR Cheers
here is the ultimate link building strategy. Never try to build links using a single site. It won't be effective. Have 3-4 related sites, with one being your money maker (preferably your highest performing site after a few months). Focus on getting inbound links to your money maker, and in exchange give out links from your other 3 sites. This way your money maker has tons of inbound links and no outbounds, and the other sites will suffer slightly, but they are just there to facilitate your main site.
I c what your saying kunkventures. Should i host the sites on different servers or it doesn't really matter
PR does not affect your search engine ranking. Onpage and offpage SEO do. Concentrate more on building quality links rather than building PR in order to drive more traffic.
If you are serious about cross linking, yes, diff hosts is best. And dont make obvious cross linking between your main sites. And lastly, outbound linking on your money maker is not always a bad idea..OBL's to trusted sites with strong serps and pr is usually a GOOD IDEA. Forget what you read about bleeding away pr...
yaa i also suggest you shouldt not think for PR. Quality back links will help you to get better serp, and not high PR Cheers
thnx every1 what do u mean by obvious cross linking...wouldn't all cross linking be obvious unless you own more than just 2 or 3 domains?