I just cannot help but notice that there is a strong tendency for a site's PR to go down over time. Especially if no new backlinks are added. I wonder whether the age of the site is taken into account with Google's PR alogorithm i.e. it requires more backlinks for older sites to reach a given PR than a new site. Surely it makes sense that older reputable sites would continue to have links added continously over time.
It is my understanding that the length of time a site has been indexed will play a factor in that sites page rank. So a site thats been around for 5 yrs will be better than those recently indexed. However, its is only one of many factors and I doubt is one of the major variables that goes into the calculation
I don't think PR is related to the ages of the site, if it does, the ages of the site only have very little affect on it. My site is 2 years and older but still pr2 and I got that when it was 4-6 months old. Other sites are much older than my site but they still have no pagerank or pr2/3.
There are tendency that as a website grew older, it continue to gain backlinks, and also, its PR goes higher, too.
It's not directly about the age of a domain but on how the site gathered quality links over the years of it's age.
Directly it doesn't appear to be a huge factor, but clearly it takes domains a long time to acquire sufficient links to gain PR. At least in a natural way.
Hi. I was wondering about this topic too. I got a big surprise when my recent domain got PR3, it was just three months old but I had worked to get some backlinks. If there was a time factor then I would have to wait more, right? This makes me think that only links count.
i think its about how much pr the site that links to you has and how many links that that site has outgoing.
it takes time to get your page rank, but it does not mean that you can just wait there, you need to work hard and wait for your page rank.