I think that the current PR method of ranking sites out of 10 is very misleading. Site 'A' could have 2 backlinks to its site from pr7/pr8 sites but have little content, and then Site 'B' could have 50,000 natural backlinks from relevant pr1/pr2 sites which link to it because it has lots of good content. Site 'A' may receive a PR7 and Site 'B' may only receive a PR3/PR4 at the most. Which site would you say was the best? I think due to this reason the current google PR ranking method is extremely flawed. I hope they are doing something to fix this. I've seen a lot of PR7 sites which are pretty useless and arent popular at all. Some may have got their high PR's from having a link from a friends high PR site or another high PR site they own. Then there are tons of really good sites out there that are really popular but have really low PR's. So I dont really see the point to the PR system, what does having a high PR mean?? Does it mean google trusts this site and think its good? I think the PR could be calculated a lot better than it is now.
That's why Google team works on improving their algo about site rankings. Hope they will find a better one.
I would actually say the PageRank algorithm is pretty good, and it is the best way to rank websites. But what is killing the value of PageRank is the market on selling links for PR. But that's just my opinion.
PR is only relevant to google. So its not useful if your looking to yahoo etc to improve your rankings on
PR is both useful and flawed. It will show you one interpretation of how the rest of the internet values or ignores your website. Unfortunately, it's just one number, a weighted average of sorts. There is no easy way of knowing whether your site has a lot of links from low PR sites or just a few from some high PR sites.
PageRank is a very good way of determining a site's potential to rank well. Rather useful if you ask me.
Flawed for me. It lessen the link selling industry of the webmasters. Although link sellers' sites are based on PR.
Yes its definately flawed. I've seen people who have one good website which might have a PR9, then all they need to do is to create a few useless websites and link to them, and they will probably all get at least a PR7. These useless PR7 websites can then be used to sell links with little or no content or even many backlinks. Google needs to somehow change the way PR is passed to other websites.
Its often said that links from healthy and good neighbourhood are given more weightage, but one thing I fail to understand is that does a good page rank alone make a good neighbourhood. Don't sites with higher page ranks spam around in the blogosphere??
The original poster makes a good point. Thousands of natural low PR backlinks should be worth more than one or two high PR backlinks. This flaw is what allows people to artificially manipulate the SERPs.