are they all equal in googles eyes? is a link from an unrelated pr7 site the same from every site? (assuming they all have the same amount of outgoing links)
From what i understand a related link is far better in googles eyes than a unrelated link. Thanks Brian
If it would be the same thing, it wouldn't count if it would be related or unrelated It's not the same thing. Backinks from the same area of interest counts more than an unrelated one. A one-way related link to your website is the best you can have
Of course not.... Not same in the eyes of Google... Links to quality sites is good while linking to unrelated site is bad to the site...
But for sure I would not refuse the link , but related and ranking on similar keywords will be better but everything is not perfect.
No link is bad for website.. Still related link is best in terms of google. Yet if you are getting pr-7 link dont miss it... Regards Sharetipsinfo
I really wouldn't sweat pagerank that much. Ideally, you want a link that carries a decent amount of your anchor text keywords on that page already. That will overcome the unrelated issue.
It won't harm you, it will also probably increase your pagerank but as far as helping you in your serps is concerned....I don't know
The link can come from an unrelated site that has a page that is related to your site, and your link is on that page. This is ok. The link that is just on an unrelated site with nothing that relates to you is ok, but it won't be weighted the same, but I would take it. Cheers
I am mildly skeptical about Google's ability to determine accurately just what a "related" site is. They talk about all their "engineers" working on the algorithms. But my experience over the years is that engineers, as skilled as they may be in technical things, would be far down my list of candidates to determine "relevance" of a site. Realistically, relevance is something full of language nuances and subtleties. A person would have to sit down and browse a website thoroughly to determine the real nature of that website. Then they would have to invest the same time and energy into a thorough perusal of website #2 to see if the two were related in some "relevant" way. To attempt to determine relevance by an algorithm is to say basically, "We don't have a clue from time-consuming hands-on inspection of each site, but we've thrown some formulas together to figure it out." Fat chance it will work! Would their algorithm read Shakespeare and the original King James bible and (incorrectly) relate them as "relevant" and related because of the similar Elizabethan-era language? Probably, but the relevance would be minimal at best. Sorry for the rant, but this old Arts-and-Sciences major has serious doubts that formulas and algorithms can come even close to determining relevance. But then again, maybe Google's engineers are smarter than I realize.