High quality backlinks increase your PR, and high quality backlinks improve your SERP, as simple as that, regardless of how you value PR.
I always knew G uses PR for a ranking factor. That blog by Matt Cutts also proved the same. I don't know why some still think PR has 100% nothing to do with SEO.
Not so. Long long ago there was a time when you used to get PR from another high PR site and invariably this was bought. However its clear that there are two schools of thought. One based on empirical evidence and the other on what Google has to say about the matter. But why argue the point? No one is going to dispute that PR has had a negative infuence on the industry and I would have thought that it was obvious to all that if we have to err it it is beter to err on the side that holds that PR is of no consequence. Is it not time to move on? Is it not time to get back to link building and more importantly content and to forget about PR?
it's relatively easy to build a site with a high PR value. This however will not guarantee that your pages will automatically be displayed high in serps on competitive keywords. What is the benefit of high pr then? it will be much easier to seo your site on those keywords. In addition, your pages will rank high in serps on less competitive keywords.
Doesnt follow any longer if it ever did. Best to forget about PR, to concentrate on serp's and building a site. There are a lot of people hurting right now after getting their fingers burnt and this industry will never be the same.
One question though. I have 5 sites and i am linking my own sites to each other. Thats not paid linking but its NOT rel=nofollowed. Exactly how is google going to work out which are paid links? Or going by this post of Cutts, even this is not allowed?
Nothing wrong with interlinking your sites, as long as you don't overdo it. Especially if the content is unrelated, it may not do you a lot of good but it won't hurt you unless you go wild with a large number of sites (Shoemoney got caught that way a year or two ago, if memory serves, but that guy probably has more sites than most of us have grains of salt).
Yeah. Thats a good point. You look at the toolbar and you see toolbar pr. I'm thinking that MC means the internal pr and probably trust that comes with it. A link on a major newspaper or big time university (if it hasn't had its ability to flow page rank blocked) will have a lot more trust and authority value than a link on 'some guys blog'
Yes. Unless otherwise specified, I would assume that all of his comments about PR are about real PR, not the toolbar stuff.
I think yes pagerank value of your own site will allow you to rank for keywords using your inner pages as a backlinks with pagerank value instance of getting links from other websites, Think about it.
It's not an "either-or" situation — that is, high PR or better SERPs. Of course a well-SEO'd page might score better in the SERPs than a poorly-SEO'd page with higher PR. That's not the issue. The important hypothetical question is this: All other SEO factors being equal, will a high-PR page consistently outrank a lower-PR page in the SERPs? I suspect so. Again, as posted earlier, I believe that a webmaster seeking success will focus on both the on-page and the off-page factors of creating good websites. Don't neglect either in favor of the other.
PR is best forgotten and if it still works, let it work quietly in the background. I believe Goggle has devalued it to the point where it means nothing. Why do I believe that? If your answer is that I am too damned mean to buy it from a pimp, you are right. And thats why Google has all but canned it. The question we need to ask is how did we get into this mess? Unfortunately however, the boys who could answer that question have apparently left the building. Strange but true to type. No balls.