Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

PR3 site beats a PR6 site. Why?


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 LoneRegister

LoneRegister

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 220 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 07:54 PM

here's one for you.

On Google search for "Dewalt 9.6V Drill"

The first link is for shop.store.yahoo (Go Figure!)

the second link is to a PR3 site.

Then - our site follows in 3rd place as a PR6 site. Any ideas why a PR3 site beats us out?

#2 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 08:21 PM

That's easy! That's because your PageRank number has very, very little to do with how you'll rank in the search engines. It's a very common misconception.

Jill

#3 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 September 2002 - 08:24 PM

PageRank by itself doesn't determine rankings although it does play a significant part. Your page is PR5, incidentally, and not PR6.

I haven't even looked skin deep but the pages' titles are significantly different and greatly favour the higher placed pages on that particular search term - "Dewalt 9.6V Drill". The proximity of the search term words within the page and its elements is important. The first 2 words of the search term (Dewalt 9.6V) appear in the higher pages' Title tags and body text whereas your page doesn't have those word adjacent to each other anywhere.

You could modify your text to have at least several instances of that phrase and, more especially, modify your Title tag by placing the words together at the front.

Example:-
The first time that my PageRank article (link in my signature) was indexed, it went in at
In your case, the exact search term doesn't appear anywhere in your page. I've only looked at Google's serps so I'm judging that by the snippet that they show. Proximity matters.

Phil.

#4 LoneRegister

LoneRegister

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 220 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 08:48 PM

Phil - Thanks for the input. I feel strangely good after being hit between the eyes with a 2x4!

Thanks! :wink: I needed that!

I am working on the grunt work now of title changes, text changing, and various other things. I only have 27,000 items to work with. Shouldn't take too long! :shock:

#5 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 September 2002 - 08:53 PM

That's easy!  That's because your PageRank number has very, very little to do with how you'll rank in the search engines.  It's a very common misconception.

What makes you think that Jill?

The heart of our software is PageRankô, a system for ranking web pages....

That's what Google is still saying about PageRank. PageRank is about ranking, and that's all that it is about. If it isn't used for ranking purposes, what is the heart of their software used for?

The misconception that you mentioned is true. PageRank isn't the biggest factor in determining the rankings. But it isn't as small a factor as some people now seem to be suggesting. It's a very significant factor. It won't allow an unoptimised page to beat a highly optimised one very easily, but it will allow a moderately optimised page to beat a highly optimised page that has less PR. PR matters much more than some people are making out these days.

Phil.

#6 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 08:57 PM

For the average site owner, who is optimizing for keyword phrases that are not highly competitive (which is what I recommend), a highly optimized page will have no problem being on top. A link from yahoo, dmoz, and a few other places should be enough links to do well.

Now, of course, having a high page rank AND a highly optimized page is killer!

Jill

#7 LoneRegister

LoneRegister

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 220 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 08:59 PM

I did some looking around. And - I notice that there are a few PR7 sites out there. I did not notice anything higher in the tool area. www.dewalt.com homepage has a PR7.

our home page is PR6 http://www.toolup.com

and our sub pages are PR5's.

Am I correct in Assuming that a PR6 is pretty decent?

#8 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 09:06 PM

PR6 is very decent. :Fade-color

#9 LoneRegister

LoneRegister

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 220 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 09:10 PM

Hey! How'd you get that cool rainbow smiley!! Darnit I want one!

My site is a PR6 because:?:

Is it because we are linked directly from the dewalt site to our site? the dewalt link page:
http://www.dewalt.com/us/retailers/
is a PR7 - and we are on that page - and often in the top 3.
Does that infer - by association a PR6?

But - that would also mean that Sleggtools (a PR3) breaks that thought... And I know quite a few others that are not PR6's.

So - how the heck did I get a PR6 when I am just learning about this darn PR stuff? :?

#10 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 11 September 2002 - 09:20 PM

So - how the heck did I get a PR6 when I am just learning about this darn PR stuff?

That's the beauty of PageRank...you don't have to know anything about it...it just happens!

PageRank is based on all the various links to your site. Links from high PageRank sites can transfer over more of their PageRank to your site, than links from low PageRank sites. But there are other factors involved. Like the number of other links on the page that links to you (fewer is better).

I wrote a easy to understand summary of Chris Ridings' PageRank Explained paper you may be interested in. The whole paper can be a bit much to read through, but the summary gives you the basic gist. You can read it here: http://www.rankwrite...es/issue070.htm
Oh, and the rainbow smiley can be found by clicking on "view more emoticons" to the left of the reply box when typing a reply!

Jill

#11 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 September 2002 - 10:14 PM

PR6 is very decent, as Jill said. But don't make the mistake that your listing for the search term that you mentioned has anything to do with your front page's PR6. Each page stands by itself so you are competing on that term with a PR5 page and not a PR6 site.

That's the beauty of PageRank...you don't have to know anything about it...it just happens!

But the more you know about it the more it "just happens" :)

Phil.

#12 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 September 2002 - 09:38 PM

Yes Phil, but remember that as far as PageRank is concerned the home page or front page is special in that is garners all the credit for the links from directories and sites that link just to the site and not to a particular page.

Lone Register, you have a PR of 6 because some 400 sites link to you and it appears that many of them are pretty good sites themselves. This incidentally is the way its supposed to work, you build a site with lots of good content and people link to you not because you ask them to but because they like what they find there.

#13 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 September 2002 - 09:46 PM

Usually, yes, Mel. But not always; e.g. we have 2 dmoz listing and neither of them link to this domain's front page. Also, whether or not the front page keeps the PR it usually garners, depends on the site's internal linkages. But in this thread, I was pointing out that the ranked page has PR5 and not the PR6 of the site's front page. The PR5 page is the one that is competing and not the site.

Phil.

#14 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 September 2002 - 09:49 PM

Hi Kevin
Sorry I should have said "...pages link to you" and not "...sites link to you". It looks like Google has indexed 256 pages from your site and the interlinkage between these pages is in itself a goodly factor in your PR of 6.

#15 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 September 2002 - 10:03 PM

Well Phil I did say "...garners all the credit for the links from directories and sites that link just to the site and not to a particular page", so we are in complete agreement there, but I cannot agree with the idea that PageRank is somehow lost through linkage to other pages.

As I understand PageRank, any PageRank credit a page gets it keeps, whether it has one outbound link or a hundred. But I am always willing to learn, if you can point me to the portion of the PR equation that shows how PR is lost by linking, I will be happy to tug my forelock and bow down.
[/b]

#16 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 September 2002 - 10:21 PM

Hi Kevin - you should give yourself more credit than you have, since if you search for Dewalt 9.6V Drill on Google (as opposed to "DeWalt 9.6v drill") you come up with the
Since I believe that most people do not use quotes when they search you are ranking very well, but the changes Phil suggested will doubtless help in the quoted search.

#17 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 16 September 2002 - 10:39 PM

...if you can point me to the portion of the PR equation that shows how PR is lost by linking...


Well, as I've been just editing the latest version of Chris's PageRank Explained paper, I'm pretty sure I did just see that formula (with graphs and charts) in there. I think it was in the first version also. In fact, I was just showing it to my son who likes that sort of thing.

The link out, does appear to lessen the overall PageRank of the site, however, there are other benefits to having those links out, which essentially cancel out any negative PageRank "leakage" that anyone might be worried about.

I might have my head up my a$$ and be wrong about this, but I'm fairly certain that this is what I saw in the charts! (That sort of thing is not my strong suit!)

Jill

#18 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 September 2002 - 10:42 PM

Have a read of this Mel:- http://www.webworksh...t/pagerank.html. It states Google's PageRank equation, which shows that a page's PR is reduced by links going from it. It has a calculator with it which calculates PR according to Google's equation. You can experiment with it to see how OBLs (outbound links - links from a page) affect a page's PR.

Phil.

#19 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 September 2002 - 10:45 PM

You're not wrong Jill. The equation results in PR loss. There's no two ways about that. It's just mathematics. But the loss occurs to the page and not to the site. Only if the OBL is to an external target, does a PR loss to the site occur; otherwise it stays within the site.

There may be other factors that offset the PR loss but PR loss does occur.

Phil.

#20 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 September 2002 - 12:33 AM

Hi Phil:
Here is the equation for PR (which BTW agrees with the on on your site):

PR(A) = (1-d) + d(PR(t1)/C(t1) + ... + PR(tn)/C(tn))

I do not see any terms in this equation that deduct PR from a page, they only add it. What is the equation that deducts the PR for outbound links?

#21 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 September 2002 - 01:11 AM

I think perhaps terminology is getting things confused here.

First as I understand PR only a page has a PR - a site does not.

If you are trying to say that by linking outside your site you are decreasing the potential arithmetic total of all the PR of the pages within the site (which may or may not be an important consideration), then I could agree with you, but if you are saying that if you have a standalone page which has say 100 pages linking in to it resulting in a PR of say 6 with no outbound links, but I then add ten outbound links to an external site, changing nothing else that the PR will Drop to 5 - then I cannot agree.

#22 LoneRegister

LoneRegister

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 220 posts

Posted 17 September 2002 - 01:30 AM

Mel - previously I was coming up after thetoolwarehouse.net

Now - since I have made some changes (Thanks Phil!!! :) ) my ranking has moved to #1 and #2.

#23 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 17 September 2002 - 07:33 AM

Mel, the way I understand it is as follows:

Say you have a site with 4 pages, all linked together using the extensive linking structure (every page is linked to every page).

If each page has a PR of 1, then the total PageRank for the site is 4 (nothing that would be seen on the toolbar of course, as that's just each page added together).

As soon as you add an outbound link, you're giving away some of that PageRank. A tiny bit, granted, but some. So the entire PageRank would be very slightly less than 4 at that point. And each individual page would be slightly less than 1.

Now, of course, as soon as you get a link inbound from another site, you're putting some back so things can even out (well it's not really even, but you see what I mean).

Does that make sense? That's my understanding of how it works.

Jill

#24 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 September 2002 - 08:11 AM

Hi Jill - Well.. yes, kind of, but by definition only pages have PageRank (sites do not) and they can never pass their full PR along to another page, there is always a deduction, usually considered to be 15% of the PR of the page.

What is really happening is not that the page is losing some of its PageRank but that it does not pass the same amount of PR on to the other pages in the site which it links to and which are in turn linking eventually back to it and thus its PageRank is not as high as it might be if it had not linked outside the site.

So what we are really talking about here is not the way a page loses PageRank when it links outside the site, but he best ways of using the available rank of the pages in a site to maximize the PR of a particular page, which is really a different thing i.e. you can use you linking sturctures to maximize the PR of those pages you want to be high (you don't like to link out from those pages) and to link out only from pages that have a low PR and perhaps many outbound links. By having sites link to your high PR pages and you link back only from lower PR pages you are maximizing your potential.

#25 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 17 September 2002 - 08:35 AM

Sounds good to me!

J

#26 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 September 2002 - 07:25 PM

Here is the equation for PR (which BTW agrees with the on on your site):

PR(A) = (1-d) + d(PR(t1)/C(t1) + ... + PR(tn)/C(tn)) 

I do not see any terms in this equation that deduct PR from a page, they only add it. What is the equation that deducts the PR for outbound links?


The whole equation results in a reduction in a page's PR when the page has one or more OBLs. It's the result of applying the equation to pages. You can see it with the calculator, which uses the equation for its calculations. It's just a matter of mathematical fact. If you don't trust the calculator, do the calculations with a pencil and paper - the result is the same :)

Phil.

#27 cvos

cvos

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 18 September 2002 - 01:14 AM

speaking about linking i have found a great tool to help you see where you are.

http://www.marketleap.com/publinkpop/

 
Links from high PageRank sites can transfer over more of their PageRank to your site, than links from low PageRank sites.  But there are other factors involved.  Like the number of other links on the page that links to you (fewer is better).


be forwarned, google and alltheweb have very different results (for incoming page links), and i tend to rely more on google, since its database is fresher. Think of google as your neighborhood grocer and alltheweb as wallmart. [/code]

#28 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 September 2002 - 03:18 AM

Hi Phil
Sorry to be such a bear on semantics, but PageRank has many people confused enough without added complications from semantics.

According to the definitions only pages can have PageRank, so I would like to suggest that we use a different term when discussing the arithmetic total of all the pages in a sites PR, which I believe is what you calculator sets out to do and which seems to be where the confusion lies. How about if we call the numbers at the top of your calculator SiteRank and the numbers along the right hand side of the calculator PageRank?

Then lets take a simple case using your calculator:

Take a simple one page site comprised of page A. A has three other PR 5 pages linking to it .
I am going to start the calculations out with initial PR set to 1 and the inbound links PR set to 5.

Calculating in simple mode the number I like to call SiteRank is 14.25 and the PageRank of page A is 12.9, but since the site has only one page why are the SiteRank and PageRank different?

Now I am add an outbound link from page A and recalculate, the siterank and the pagerank remain unchanged.

OK, lets switch to calculating in real mode

oops now the calculator says that the site has no SiteRank and page A does not have any PR even though three inbound PR5 pages link to it and it does have an outbound link.

We seem to be getting other than real world results, since it has perfectly good inbound links,isnot an orphan page or have dangling links.

Could it be that your calculator is set up so that it sees no outgoing links from page A (in the table) and thus drops it in Real Mode?

Google has an extra step in which it does another set of iterations to add back the orphans and dangling links to the calculation.

#29 cvos

cvos

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 18 September 2002 - 04:10 AM

 
As soon as you add an outbound link, you're giving away some of that PageRank. A tiny bit, granted, but some.  So the entire PageRank would be very slightly less than 4 at that point. And each individual page would be slightly less than 1.


ok - if you loose PR for each outbound link on a page, why do these 2 pages have similar PR (6)

http://www.netpaths.net/

http://www.netpaths.net/portfolio/

the homepage links to internal pages and the internal portfolio page links to external site pages? PR be dammed, if you have a 1 page site, google wont list you, there is no content.

#30 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 18 September 2002 - 07:27 AM

ok - if you loose PR for each outbound link on a page, why do these 2 pages have similar PR (6)

Cayley, the amount of PR loss is a teeny-tiny fraction and would not be noticeable on the Google toolbar. I'm not talking like a whole number here. Remember, toolbar PageRank is not the same as any page's "actual" PageRank.

Jill

#31 Guest_Phil_*

Guest_Phil_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 September 2002 - 12:26 PM

Hi Mel,

I'll go along with your "SiteRank" term. Let's see if the world will follow :)

The calculator sets out to do 3 things:-

(1) make sure that a site achieves its maximum SiteRank potential.

(2) make sure that the pagerank within a site is channeled to the page(s) where it is most useful.

(3) help people to understand how each page's PageRank is affected by linkages.

Take a simple one page site comprised of page A. A has three other PR 5 pages linking to it .
I am going to start the calculations out with initial PR set to 1 and the inbound links PR set to 5.

Calculating in simple mode the number I like to call SiteRank is 14.25 and the PageRank of page A is 12.9, but since the site has only one page why are the SiteRank and PageRank different?


The reason is that you didn't set up a 1-page site (grid). You used a 10 page site in Simple Mode and, in Simple Mode, the equation allocates 0.15 to each page, as you can see from the right column. If you set up a 1-page grid, the SitRank and PageRank are identical.

Unfortunately, I can't look at the other examples in the depth required because I can't spend the time online at the moment. So I'm saving this until I get back home next week. It may be that the calculator isn't calculating for the OBLs correctly and I need to examine closely what's happening. But I'll get back to it during next week - so don't go away :)

Yes I know that Google reintroduces dangling link pages near the end of the iterations but no calculator can produce accurate pagerank figures because we don't know the 'actual' starting pagerank of any pages. All a calculator can realistically do is show the proportioning. That's why I didn't go to the lengths of reintroducing dangling link pages. We don't know the exact number of iterations that Google do and we don't know the precise iteration when danglers are put back into the pot.

Phil.

#32 Guest_Mel_*

Guest_Mel_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 September 2002 - 10:56 PM

Hi Mel,

I'll go along with your "SiteRank" term. Let's see if the world will follow icon_smile.gif

The calculator sets out to do 3 things:-

(1) make sure that a site achieves its maximum SiteRank potential.

(2) make sure that the pagerank within a site is channeled to the page(s) where it is most useful.

(3) help people to understand how each page's PageRank is affected by linkages.


I think that these are all valuable goals and that you have achieved them very well.
With your permission I would like to include a link to your calculator in the discussion of PR when I update my site soon.

#33 MJR

MJR

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 210 posts

Posted 09 October 2002 - 04:22 PM

Let me add a question for you to ponder. I have read that the length (time) of the site on the Net has some small part in the rankings, it does make some sense to me and in doing some non-scientific investigating it appears that there might be something to it...opinions? :robot:

#34 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 09 October 2002 - 04:39 PM

have read that the length (time) of the site on the Net has some small part in the rankings


That does seem to be true from what I've seen. But I've seen it with optimized sites. Not sure if a site that was never optimized would have any benefit.

But I do have some old client sites out there that are still ranking very highly without ever changing a thing, and it's really hard to get a new site optimized to beat them. (I actually did have one once in the same field, and the 2nd one I did couldn't seem to touch that first one!)

Jill

#35 Guest_PhilC_*

Guest_PhilC_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 October 2002 - 09:20 PM

I think that these are all valuable goals and that you have achieved them very well. 
With your permission I would like to include a link to your calculator in the discussion of PR when I update my site soon.

Thank you Mel. A link from your site would be very welcome ;)

Phil.



RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users