So there's no PR any more - alternatives?

Keep believing that!!! In Google directory there is a newly updated pr, so those who think that Google will suddenly stop displaying visible PR are heading for a big disappointment.

 

Sure but even if PR were to update within the next couple of days I think you will find that there will be significantly fewer buyers and I think that is precisely what Google wants. Its embarrassed to be associated with an industry that has no substance. That much you cant dispute. They are trying to tell you something or they are rather trying to tell the buyers that they have been had.

 

Different scale? that's really interesting. Imagine Google introducing two different scale to display PR - pure BS. Pr export is a different thing. First you have to understand how this thing works:
1. Goggle takes a snopshot of your pages. Calculates their backlinks, pr, based on a number of different factors.
2. Exports the values to the directory
3. Exports the pr values to the toolbar.
Directory list values of a page, in many cases tha's a home page. I got some subpages listed in the directory and they have a different pr value from my homepage

 

I don't want to list it here.
Google is in the business of selling links. What do you see at the top of serps - paid links. Google says that they don't carry any pr juice because they are in script. Well, sure, Google doesn't sell links based on pr, but on traffic. They want you to do the same thing. I'm soRRRRRY, but you're not Google. If you have a traffic of 10 millions visitors, then, surely you can do it that way. Google created the link selling system and of course they want to capitalize on it as much as possible. You don';t sell, we will sell it for you - thanx Google

 

If you have to ask this question,you obviously aren't a legit publisher. All you MFA junkies etc.Welcome to the real world where there are no shortcuts...

 

Its academic and not what we are talking about. Its PR thats in the spotlight, PR no longer sells and anyone buying it at this stage needs their head read. Things might change a with some determined PR and aggressive marketing and things might bounce back a bit. But the writing is clearly on the wall for all to see.

 

You seem to have some problem with sellers and buyers. I don't think it's a bad thing as long as you do it in some cleaver way that doesn't annoy your visitors. Google introduced its Adsense program, look what happened to a lot of websites. There are millions of spammers now soiling the Internet with MFA pages. Does Google want to be associated with that? What's wrong with injecting a few links (that you don't have to click) in my articles. It's certainly less annoying than Adsense all over the place.
It's Google's problem to catch all the paid links but that question is 'what for".
They wanna protect their serps and don't want you to influance their serps then what should you do? - not place any links on you website just not to spike Google?
if the links make sense in context, Google should count them and attach value to them. I suggest that they start cleaning the spam they created before they start going for paid links

 

I dont have problem with paid links but I do have a problem with buyers selling links to pass on PR that they know has no value. That is other than the fact it can be used to sucker a directory owner into to buying it just so they can resell it. This is a dead end business. I would also have a problem if Google decided to devalue directories as a source of back links which is why I have a problem with the dead beats in that dead end market.

No matter which way you look at it Google just has to pull the strings and we all hop and skip to their tune. With good reason.

 

I think that directories' days are numbered - and rightly so. Those are useless websites that don't benefit anyone. Just a bunch of paid or free links and no contents. But if they are gone, what should a webmaster do to get his links ('cause links are a very important part of the Google algo)?
I think Google wants you to place links intelligently now. No footer, sidebar, or anything like that. Just put in context and making sense.

 

I think it is a 'break' from PR to try to stop people selling links.

 

Which is why we need to change things and think before we do. We are showing emerging directory masters how to grow organic links and whilst its still selling links, its more about ones mindset.

 

You can't stop people from buying links but they have to do it in a smart way. Directories are not a good way to go. I've never had one, but seen a lot of them and they are of no value. organic links are difficult and Google knows that. Google encourages people to use "nofollow" tag, so how the heck can you possibly collect links? If you run a reputable, well-established site, nobody minds linking to you, but there aren't too many of these around.
Matt Cutts is running around screaming about paid links. I think Google should get their priorities straight and remove the sites that are pure crap. They are currently doing that but this thing will take a lot of time.
I don't want Matt to tell me whether i can sell links or not, they should work on their algo and devalue paid links - But that's my humble opinion

 

I agree. Matt even tells us to collect links in our niche. When I start a new project - how do I get these links? Link exchange or buying links. Google does not like both types of links... strange.

My opinion: they want "links for traffic" only - just because AdWords is a "buy links for traffic" system.

I cannot see why "links for traffic" are ethically correct while links for PR are bad. "Links for PR" are actually "Links for traffic through SERPs" (assuming that PR effects SERPs in any way - I think so because otherwhise PR would be completely useless for Google).

 

Well, it's not a secret that the PR in the google directory scales 0.00 to 8.00 (see other threads here in dp). Don't call it BS just because you don't know this.

Everybody knows how the PR export and the PR display of the toolbar works. The point is that the Google Directory is not a replacement for the PR visible in the toolbar.

PR is the only ranking factor SEOs know of by sure. We don't know the effect of PR to SERPs, but we know it is a factor (Matt confirmed this). There are hundreds of other factors, but all are kept secret.

 

The scale fro 1 to 8 is a hoax. Somebody said that some time ago and people believe it
Look at this
http://www.google.com/Top/Computers/Internet/Searching/Directories/Yahoo/?il=1
Yahoo is listed there with pr10 - or if you prefer pr8 that looks like pr10

 

Probably it is a hoax, proabably it isn't. Probably they display the PR including fractions, probably not... conclusion: we just don't know and the PR display in the Google Directory is of no use.

It's much like the PR "high/medium/low" in the GWT - useless.

 

Pr in the directory is as accurate as the pr in the toolbar. You can fake the toolbar but not the directory though - so which one do you trust?

 

But PR is completely useless. It was tooo easy to create artifical value and gave rise to an industry that had zero substance. Besides gettng new sites indexed a little quicker it does not have any influence on the serp's. I dont care what Matt says. I havent seen any hard evidence and its just wishful thinking.

Try the real thing. Is so much tastier.

 

If PR is completely useless... why does Google calculate it at all?

 

You may say that backlinks don't matter either and you will be right. It all depends. Google introduced a trust rank that values some pages in terms of how trusted they are. The trust rank is part of pr - still doesn't matter, does it?