Which is better? Low pr, high relevance , or high pr low relevance? I know some guys that got a lot of high pr, no relevance links but they are some how #1.
Yeah I see that a lot, I find that if you don't get visitors then PR is not exactly great. Remember PR is something created much more recently to show how well a site is listed, not how successful it is or busy it is. I'd go for high pr low relevance if I find a quick method then begin building up visitors, but really I focus on relevance and visitors!
Relevancy is much more important for serps than just the pagerank where the link is coming from. The only exception would maybe be general directories, where owners usually could care less about traffic and just want alot of green bar. PR does not equal traffic, and one could most certainly have a PR 3 website pulling in substantially more traffic than a PR 5 site in the same niche.
So a relevant pr3 is better than a nonrelevant pr7? Would google penalize for non-relevant inbound links?
Well .. there is to many factors in the idea of PR ..however EVERY ONE seems to flock to them .. even me .. lol So .. the magic continues..
Yes, most certainly. The better the page your link is on ranks for the term you're after the more value is going to be passed back to your site for that term as well. The non-relevant PR7 certainly wouldn't hurt your site, only that it may not help that much when it comes to a bump in search rankings. For pagerank, obviously the PR7 would be better and would probably help get other pages indexed linked from that page, but it won't do much for ranking. Think of it this way, would you rather take medical advice from your local doctor (PR3) or the President of the United States (PR10) who has no medical experience? Obviously the President is considered a more important person, but who would be best to pass judgement on your medical condition? That's really the best way I can explain it, and when folks start thinking that way they'll see better results.
It really depends on what you want to do with the site. Most sites look for traffic and that is based on high relevance. The more related a site is that you link to, the better chance to get traffic. If you are looking to sell links or a quick turn around sell of the site, then high PR is more important. People love to see their sites with high PR so it has become much more important than it should be. I always suggest worry about getting good traffic, that is what pays the best depending on how you monetize your site.
Weight on PR isn't very high at all. High relevance is much more important, as well as relevant links.
High PR is better, it will add weight to your site and pull your pages out of the supp index so they actually get found in a search. People go on about relevancy way too much.
relevance is key.... I've noticed that you need fewer links to rank higher when you concentrate on relevant links.... have you ever seen a site with few links on the first page for a competitive term? It is usually because the site has very relevant links
Ok ranter want to do a test? We will grab 2 new info domains, put up identical sites and you give yours 10 low PR highly relevant backlinks. And i will give mine 10 high PR totally irrelevant backlinks and we both use the same anchor and see who comes out on top? You say you need less when relevant so having the same as me should be a piece of cake for you right? I will even give you a head start and not apply a backlink until yours is cached. This will quieten the "if your site isnt cached first you will be thrown in supp for duplicate content" people at the same time. You up for it? I've tested this a number of times, so im confident.
I'm sure your site will come out on top because your test only involves 10 links.....very small sample
Most of webmasters buy links with high PR... But for me relevance is the key... no matter if that site is PR 0 as long as your both related.