10 replies to this topic

[Tom Anthony]

Hi,

I'm sure this direct issue has been covered somewhere, but if so I've not seen it.

We know that for good SEO you need to get inbound links from quality websites; this is mentioned in pretty much any guide on SEO. Some then go on about how to find such websites and how to judge their quality.

My question is, which is better:

• A site that is high in the SERPs for your target keywords, but with a low PR
• A page (on topic) with a high PR which doesn't do well SERPs

I know it is probably a bit of both, and dependent on the situation, and obviously high PR sites at the top of the SERPs would be best. But in most cases, it is a decision between which to pursue first; any opinions or insights into this?

I will try to find a good example which isn't related to one of my sites, and may help to clarify my question.

[bwelford]

That is a tough question,Tom Anthony. Sometimes it's extremely difficult to develop answers on very subtle questions. There is no easy way to do tests that can give you reliable answers.

The search engines normally are trying to deliver what a superhuman human might believe was a relevant result. Sometimes trying to figure out how human visitors might react can suggest what the answer might be. In this case I would guess that the on-topic page that does not do well in the SERPs would not deliver much traffic. I would assume that the first site, which is more SERP visible, is a better deliverer of traffic. So by that logic, a link from that page would be more valuable.

[Ron Carnell]

If you believe in the power of Page Rank, then a high PR link is always going to be better than a low PR link. That's especially true, I think, when compared with SERP rankings, which aren't based on "importance," but rather are based on relevance. Getting a high ranking is easy, after all, or as someone recently pointed out to me, every site ranks well for something. That doesn't necessarily make them all good link targets, though.

If you find a web page with good PR that nonetheless doesn't rank well for your keyword, I think that can mean a couple of different things.

It might mean that page isn't quite as related to your site as you imagined it was. At least that's what the search engine seems to be thinking.

However, it could also mean you're not seeing the whole picture. I put a qualifier on my first answer ("if you believe in the power of Page Rank") for a reason. The truth is that you don't ever really KNOW the PR of a page. You're only seeing what Google wants you to see, and sorry, but that ain't necessarily the truth. It's almost never the whole truth.

If you find a high PR page that fails to rank well, there's always going to be a reason for it. It might be your analysis of its relevance is skewed, it might be a flaw in the SE algorithm, OR it might mean that page is doing something the engines don't like. Every instance is going to different, but I suspect all of them will boil down to those three possibilities. It's up to you to decide which is the more likely.

[Tom Anthony]

bwelford - I do like your take on this - and you are absolutely right. It should be about how a human would view the relevancy, but we know that it isn't ever like that. Additionally, a lot of the top SERP results are direct competitors.

I think - as you say, it's a subtle question and as such the answer is quite specific to the situation.

As I compiled stats to share you the details of my specific case, I started to see details which help to answer my question in this case. So my advice to anyone unsure is take the time to compile stats for the sites in the SERPs and the high PR sites, then decide from there. I noted PageRank, type of site (directory, indirect competitor, direct competitor), age of site, SERPs position, and for directories the cost and quality of links.

Once you have all that information in black and white (rather than just reviewing it mentally) you might see a pattern emerge.

Edited by Tom Anthony, 09 September 2008 - 10:46 AM.

[iamlost]

* A site that is high in the SERPs for your target keywords, but with a low PR
* A page (on topic) with a high PR which doesn't do well SERPs

I gave up linkchasing except via content building and indirect advertising, years ago. It just wasn't interesting and the ROI was poor. That said some considerations:

Unless you are offering oodles of cash there has to be a reason for them to link out to you - often what you have to offer: content, tone, etc. better fits one than another.

A page that is high in the SERPs for your keywords just might consider you a competitor (at least for those terms) so may not be interested.

A page that has high/low SERP in one SE may be the opposite in others - there is more than one SE. Diversity is a good thing.

What are the traffic numbers/sources? Just because a site is high in a particular SERP does not mean that it must get lots more traffic - the other may get tons from blogs or other SM. And would you rather have high traffic low conversion or the other way around - how targeted are the different traffic sources?

TBPR is changed infrequently - do you know their historical positions? Are they likely static or likely to be changing.

What is the rest of each site like? If the high TBPR page is surrounded by low TBPR pages some new internal links could change the situation greatly. And conversely for a low TBPR page surrounded by higher TBPR pages or if it should get (as on topic often does) new backlinks.

And finally - just because TBPR shows high does not mean that it passes any - there are onsite methods of withholding (some can not be easily detected) and what Google passes only Google knows.

[Tom Anthony]

Ron Carnell - You make some excellent points. The high PR pages generally mostly directory pages based on my topic. One is the Yahoo directory page for my topic (but not exact keywords). A couple of others are blog tag aggregator pages. So they have high PR and are relevant; but are not the sort of results that a human searching would be wanting to find.

And you are right about the PR of a page, which I guess points out that in this case I need to pay attention to finding a balance between PR and relevance.

[EGOL]

I don't think that PR is a currency anymore.

The real questions are....

Are the links on-theme?

Are the links from highly trusted sites?

Do you have a trusted site?

[Ron Carnell]

I think PR is definitely still a form of currency, Egol. Whether it directly correlates to rankings, however, is a different question entirely.

[iamlost]

I think PR is definitely still a form of currency...

But not the hallowed gold standard that some SEOs wish upon it - or build business models upon. That died sometime prior to 2003 when G went off the straight PR gold standard and it became but one of many fluctuating paper currencies in circulation.

And as Google sets the rates and Google controls the supply and it is all a great big algorithmic secret it is best not to become obsessed. With either Au or PR. Or for that matter with FeS2 or TBPR.

[A.N.Onym]

And again, if you believe in link weight (PR), then another factor that wasn't mentioned was how many links the page has. If it is a quality page, but your link will be among hundreds, this will give you neither traffic nor great link weight, unless the page is really strong, which never happens in directories. More like resource and reference lists.

Then agan, I'd judge the page more by the traffic it can send to me and how much trust the external site has, not PR or rankings. Theoretically speaking, though, if you want to rank high, getting links from on-topic pages that rank high might get you something, if the links do pass link value to the SEs.

Edited by A.N.Onym, 09 September 2008 - 11:24 PM.

[Black_Knight]

But in most cases, it is a decision between which to pursue first; any opinions or insights into this?

You're absolutely right that you need both.

PageRank is still very important in terms of getting content spidered and indexed regularly and deeply, so for a larger site, or one that updates frequently, where high Page Saturation will be important, you'll need to nail a minimal level of PR first.

However, once your content is indexed as you'd like, getting it ranking well is far more about relevant citations, and links on other highly ranked sites for your keywords is a big factor in algorithms such as Hilltop (Google), or the Teoma algorithm. For that, the PageRank isn't the important factor.

PageRank is still absolutely fundamental to TrustRank however, and that will need to be considered too.

As you surmised, it is a situational decision, dependant on your exact situation, and your precise objectives. The above are just two examples of how the situation changes the needs.