Sorry if a thread already exist about it but I didn't find it. I just read this study from Fortune Interactive In which they analyse the SERPs for the keyword "laptop" and weight the factors which permit to some pages to rank well on all three search engines. I was wondering what you think about the results. Especially the importance of off-pages optimization factors compare to on-pages one. And the so light weight for links quantity Vs links quality. For instance, the Inbound link quality would be 42 times more important than Inbound link quantity. Do you think, compares to your experiences, these figures are accurates ?
Any company that fails to mention the age of a website as one of the most important ranking factors on google is not worth reading about. There are 100-200 factors that afffect search rankings and I suggest you read http://www.seomoz.org/articles/search-ranking-factors.php
Hm, there is one interesting sentence here Note : content on the page, not content of the link. IMHO, search engine do statistical analysys of page and site. So, if you fit into their analyzers as "mobile" site (handy) and you link to "furniture" site they might notice it. But, if your site fit into "directory" (examples dmoz) they will do analyze of the PAGE, not the site. Same might be the cases with sites which doesn't have clear theme, I mean their statistical analysators cannot determine it (hm... refinance-your-mortgage-while-watching-porns-and-downloading-mp3-music.com they might not notice link unrelevancy if page seems to be relevant
Yes, I understand what you mean, but I guess they didn't try to analyse all the factors, just to evaluate the relative weight of some of them. BTW, I already read the article you suggest me, thanks, it's a really good one. And about the whorthiness of the compagny, your source, seomoz, seems to give them some credits, here & here for instance. That's true, I didn't realise that. The revelancy should be judged not only on the page on which is the link but also by surrounding pages content.
Sorry, I did lapsus I meant : content of the page, not content of the site. So, if their statistical analyzators cannot determine the content of the site (general), they will analyze is the content of the page relevant to the content to the link. If it is not relevant they will devalue it. If there are a lot of (statistical speaking) unrelevant links they will probably trigger the alarm for manual review.
Well, I don't know about any manual review, maybe. But for sure, revelancy of the page in which is the link, and perharps "weighted revelancy" of surrounding pages (and maybe not of the whole site because some sites can "legitimately" be multi-topics) out-weight any other factors. Definitely a thing to keep in mind when getting a link.
Yes sure, but I guess manual reviews are for site suspected to use black hat techniques. I don't think there is manual reviews to establish the ranking of a page in the SERPs, which is the topic of this study.