Cutts: PR to "game Google's rankings"

Quote from Matt Cutts: “As someone working on quality and relevance at Google, my bottom-line concern is clean and relevant search results on Google. As such, I care about paid links that flow PageRank and attempt to game Google’s rankings. I’m not worried about links that are paid but don’t affect search engines. So when I say “paid links” it’s pretty safe to add in your head “paid links that flow PageRank and attempt to game Google’s rankings.”

Hmm, twice Matt refers to “...paid links that flow PageRank and attempt to game Google’s rankings”. Do I detect a subtle admission that PageRank affects Google’s rankings? That thought (PR —> effect on SERPs) is currently anathema to many webmasters. But isn’t that what Matt’s statement — perhaps an inadvertent slip of the tongue — is saying? Your thoughts?

Source: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-report-paid-links/

P.S. I'm not trying to reignite a contentious PR-SERPs debate. But I am curious what Matt Cutts's statement could mean other than that he is acknowledging that search engine rankings can be "gamed" by increasing a site's PageRank.

 

PR is just one of many things that affects rankings....but it affects for sure !

 

Where have you been for the last decade?

Since the last century Google has had up on its Technology page "The heart of our software is PageRankâ„¢, a system for ranking web pages...."

PR may play less of a part than it used to but I can't believe there is webmaster with a brain who thinks it plays no part in ranking.

- Michael

 

Heres an IDEA

Build your site for users and you won't have to worry about google.

I know building a site for the end user is something from the 1980's BUT hey, it really works

At least for me it does,

So many people worry so much what google thinks that they totally forget about the end user,

Bottom line = BUILD A SITE THAT HAS VALUE , and links or no links you will have a successful site

 

No ways Google is going to admit that PR is totally useless and ineffective and that they dont even use it. But it is and Google is trying its best to distance itself from what has been referred to as an "unsavoury" practise and "false economy" that is being driven by elements gaming PR in order to profiteer from peoples erroneous assumption that it will help them in the serp's .

 

Valuable content is overrated.

I just want the dumb bastards to click on my ads.

 

I completely agree with you Sundaybrew, it works for your visitors and it works with the search engines (and not only Google).

 

PR and SERPS are both influenced by the most important seo-secret: *psst*backlinks*psst*

 

Uhh, Michael, I've posted that very quote a number of times on DP, because I believe it (curiously, many seem not to believe it).

 

Ask yourself this: Where have you been hearing statements about PageRank being totally meaningless or worthless? Not from Google. Not from Matt Cutts. It's been at the heart of Google from Day 1.

But as noted above, PageRank isn't the only factor involved or invoked in Google rankings. And for that reason, the obsessive focus on PR exclusively - and especially on the almost meaningless Public PR as displayed in the Google Toolbar - has been consistently discouraged and played down by Cutts and other Google spokesmen.

 

Good advice for the on-page issues of website design. Better advice is to focus on both on-page and off-page factors that make for an effective website. Both are needed for a top-quality site.

 

Ranking pages and serp's the same thing? Think not. Try valuing pages instead. The rest is history. An unhappy experience which has come to an untimely end and which might just be replaced by something shiny and new.

 

Absolutely. Ignore either of those factors at your peril.

On the other hand, I think the point was that a primary focus on on-page factors will often lead you to improvement in off-page factors with little or no effort. Especially if you focus on the long-term instead of get-rich-quick and have a little patience.

Organic link-building actually does work. It just takes a bit more time.

 

Probably because they are confused and have not read my post from a couple of years ago

- Michael

 

I couldn't agree more. On a typical day I spend maybe ten minutes building links. I spend typically three hours on each new page — researching keywords, writing, rewriting. And it is paying off in a steady rise in unique visitors, page views, and SERPs (and organic links ).

 

There are certainly some self-proclaimed SEO experts - who post PR is just a meaningless number on toolbar and for fun One can find dozens of those kind of claims in posts on the Sticky PR Thread
Certaily, PR is one of the most essential facts for Google SERPs and thats the reason Google is hell-bent on discounting the links-juice from a paid link - Matt said time and again Google has no problem at all for links with no-follow

 

Page Relevance I believe is more important like have synonymous words related to your on page content...Page rank does matter but only one of the many factors because you will see many sites get out ranked by lower page rank sites....HMMM maybe cuz of relevance!

 

I's substitute PageRank with backlinks. PR is a measure of backlinks, backlinks affect SERPs, seems to make sense to me. But just my opinion.

 

I don't think the pagerank displayed in the toolbar matters all that much.

Links flow page rank and the internal pagerank it what matters.

 

Yes, except it should say "Some links flow page rank; some don't".