is that most people makes PR a basis in ranking on SERP. Specifically in Google...Maybe a brief explanation of PR and SERP isn't needed because it has been defined for almost a thousand times on different SEO forums. So, my question is this, why is it PR mistakenly taken as a basis with regards to SERP ranking? I've read and even replied to most threads I found about this one and I said that PR has nothing to do with SERP ranking. I noticed that there are still threads popping up with this kind of issue. Maybe a proof that lets PR affects SERP ranking will be a great thing to be posted.
I would say that SERP affects PR, because with high positions normally shows you have good content, with good content naturally there will be more back links, with more back links the higher the PR.
Yes your own PR has nothing to do with SERP ranking. But if your site get links from related sites with good PR your site can move up in SERP rankings.
erm.. what is this April 01?? I thought it was January? While I commend your ability to see beyond PageRank, to say it has nothing to do with document scoring is silly there matey. Actually, many of the additional methodologies looked at by Google in patent filings actually reference the original PageRank patent and methodologies. What has changed is additional layering of other methods (algos) and subsequent so-called, turning of the dials (setting thresholds). So.. to say PR is the only ranking factor is wrong as is saying that it has nothing to do with the ranking process. Many SEO enthusiasts have become myopic in focussing on a single element of a set of algorithms that has been moving away from its nodal core (back links) since at least 2004.... ... much like the recent fuss about the Google algorithm change Folks just can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that scoring mechanisms are more like layers on an onion.. not swapping one out for another...
hey dude, you don't have to be so arrogant about this kind of simple issue about PR and SERP ranking. Also, you don't have to explain these simple things too deeply in geeky terms, we just need direct and simple answers ... as an SEO, I'm sure you know that it is a continous process and everyday seems to be another day that SEO world has some update about its system...What if the algo of Google last April (as you said) isn't like the one that it has now(January). I'm sure you know that algo's of SEs changes from time to time...and as a matter of fact, those things are not the issue here. what my concern is PR and SERP relation...that's it.
calm down dude ... As an SEO, PR and SERP has a relation? yes! Because if you really think about it you may not gain your PR with out related links and in promoting your targeted keyword on SERP you must have to boost your keyword by promoting your anchor text keyword through getting links... for me, It is a cycle analysis...
dood...keep yer socks on. I was being playfull, not anything else bro... when I am being an ass it is hard to miss... ( I am ok when ya get used to me) Second, my reference to April was about this being an April Fools Joke And lastly, PageRank still has a great deal to do with the scoring and ranking mechanisms within Google. What most folks are getting messed up with is; A. I am talking about PageRank the algorithm not ToolBar PageRank which is an entirely different animal and nearly unrelated these days. B. PageRank was the core of the scoring unto which many other methods have been subsequently been added since back in the day. Sorry I got under yer skin mate... just my way about things, once ye get to know me I am okee dokee.... I am just a rambling ranting kind of guy.... So, there is NO REASON to bother with TBPR... BUT the PageRank algorithm is alive and well, just mutated somewhat over the years.... Lately I have even been tracking ranking mechanisms relating to User Performance Metrics which can be seen best in Google's personalized search Way back in February of last year I covered potential issues relating to Phrase Based Indexing and Retrieval which was furthered in the summer with patents relating to probabilistic models closley related to the phrase based stuff.... and that trail is from early 2006. You can see why folks get lost. They stayed in 2004 with PageRank and haven't noticed the changes. There are just soooo many other potential factors in play beyond PageRank, it seems muddy to the unitiated... but PageRank, is alive and well....
It's not a mistake, it's a reality. Read Google's own info on pagerank. http://www.google.com/corporate/tech.html Pagerank is not the only factor in determining your placement in the serps, but it is a factor.
PR is compose of IBLs right?...So, its all about IBLs...therefore, its IBLs that has a relation with SERP ranking. Because PR is merely just grey toolbar which composes only of IBLs. isn't it? isn't it more appropriate to say that "IBLs affects SERP ranking" than in "PR affects SERP ranking"
PR is NOT a grey bar it is an algorithm, what you are confusing is the TOOLBAR PAGE RANK.... (U even reading the stuff I am passing man?) Sound like ya'll ar the confused ones..... yeesshh... there is PR and there is TBPR .... completely different conversations
ok, so PR is an algo as you said and TBPR is an indicator...so how about the thing I said about the relation just to get back on the issue?
Last time... getting too frustrated mate... Ok, TBPR is nearly useless as a metric of any kind... it is an oft updated metric that is known to be manipulated... it isn't of much use at all... NOW... don't allow yourself or others, to propogate the myth that PAGERANK is not valued metric... we simply don't know the internal PR of a site (the ACTUAL PageRank of a page)... that doesn't mean we ignore the laws and princinples attached thereto... SO yes, SCREW the ol TBPR... just be sure to state that... not that PR has no play in the document ranking process... that is horribly wrong We cool now bro?
Ok, we cool alright . thanks for the lecture about PR though... just to get back with the issue, as I was saying... ... ...
Ok, we cool alright . thanks for the lecture about PR though... just to get back with the issue, as what I said in my recent post... ... ...