If I’m paying for links, I want a lot more tangible evidence from the site owner. I want stats that tell me how visible the links are across all major search engines, how much traffic they send, and how much traffic they attract overall. I want to see the site owner is a savvy online marketer and is an authority in his community or is developing a presence as such. I need to know he understands and uses analytics to provide tactical data. This is sound, useful marketing intelligence. It’s a lot more important to me than a meaningless 4 or 5 in a little sprinkling of green fairy dust above the pages.Is Google’s PageRank algorithm fundamentally broken, as Mike asserts? I don’t think so. What I am certain of however is that the PageRank values shown in the Google Toolbar are imprecise, months old, and not the same as the PageRank as what is used in Google’s ranking algorithm. PageRank scores are merely indicative. Of course you have to take them with a grain of salt. PageRank as an algorithm is alive and well, and will adapt with the times. One way we can probably expect to see it evolve is with the incorporation of “TrustRank“, a concept where a small number of reputable seed pages are used to help differentiate good pages from spam. I’m not giving up on PageRank any time soon. Especially after reading John Battelle’s heartwarming account of the birth and evolution of PageRank. It’s a great story… makes me want to run out and buy Google stock.
Mike Grehan, an SEO guru for whom I have the greatest respect, rails on PageRank in his ClickZ article “What Price PageRank? Part 2.” I don’t agree with everything he says, but this little pearl of Mike’s is some sage advice about not buying links based on PageRank score alone:
I really wonder if Page Rank was ever what we mere mortals ever wanted it to be but these days I think it’s a figure that has most relevance to the site owner himself.
My page 1 SERP results have never come from pages with anything better than a 3 and more often a 2 so it does give us something to think about.
And life would be dull if we didn’t have the mysteries of the modern world to think about. 🙂
I agree with Mike on this one. It isn’t that PR seems broken, not at all. But I don’t think Google gives it as much weight as it once did, because it knows – as we all do – that it can be manipulated.
Contextual content and clever link creation, rather than a spammy approach to link-building based on PR, seems to be the way forward.
Of course Google keeps us all guessing, but this is my take on it, for good or ill.
Neil Patel says
I personally am not a fan of buying text links, but if you decide to buy text links the deciding factor should not be PageRank. Instead you should look at a number of factors such as relevance, traffic the site receives, number of outbound linksâ€¦.
I think buying backlinks is a little penalty.
Because, irrelevant backlinks have not much importance.
Lets say if your website is about sport and you get a backlink from another sport website this will rank much. Espacilly directories that has lots of irrevalant links is socu ha useful thing I think.
My personel thought serp is logarithmically related to the content of web site, relevant and rich and unique content.
Backlinks is buying BlackSeoMen who have not unique content.
Its my personal opinion that google pagerank is still important. In my case, it is my personal goal to earn in the internet. I had a friend who introduced me on how to earn in the internet. She is very successful and she is earning hundreds of dollars a month and increasing. She says that one of the important things for me to earn is to increase my google page rank so that many advertisers will allow some of their ads to be posted on my site and they will pay me for it.