Stop “SEOing” in the 90’s
I have read a few posts lately on others outlook on “page rank”, and that has prompted me to post another update as to why people should stop focusing on page rank so much. I try to teach and educate people to the best of my ability, but sometimes I guess stubbornness (or pride) outweighs other people’s ability (or want) for success. Oh well, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink, right?
If you spend to much time focusing on page rank (and what yours is), or only looking for sites with high page rank to get links from, then again, I would suggest stuffing keywords and hiding text (I am being sarcastic) for better rankings. Stop”SEOing” in the 90’s!
On some other blogs I author I have been referring to Jim Boykin alot, so lets see what Jim Boykin (probably one of the biggest authorities when it comes to Link Building) has to say about page rank:
Now, in 2007 rankings change daily, Pagerank updates about every 3-6 months…and is based on a score calculated 3-6 months prior to the updating day….saying that Page rank is Stale is an understatement….also saying that pagerank effects rankings is a lie.
Notice the bolded text as I added that to prove my point. At best, you are celebrating something up to 6 months old, and it does not effect rankings period.
About the only thing useful I have found page rank for lately is some websites that offer services like “contextual advertising” (way for blog publishers to make money) requires a site to have a certain PR (most of the time PR 4 from what I have seen). To them I say, “Get your guidelines out of the 90’s as well, and start paying more attention to the cache date, and learn a little more about virgin links.
Of course, if you don’t want to take this advice then I will enjoy outranking you 100% of the time!
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to our RSS feed!
Related Posts:
Point well made. What I’m seeing more and more is that it’s really hard to accurately determine EXACTLY why sites have PageRanks and how important they really are. Example, Christer starts a blog in December that is basically a compilation of other people’s blogs. It’s a great idea and is something I look at a lot. All of a sudden it has a PR3 after only a few weeks online. Why? It’s hard to say for sure. Maybe it’s because he’s got links to others sites that have high PageRanks. Maybe it’s because alot of us have linked to him. Maybe it’s none of those factores. To me, and I definitely may be wrong, Christer’s website contradicts what Jim Boykin is saying about the “3-6 months prior” idea.
If PageRank doesn’t have some clout, how do we determine which places are best to build links? How do we determine if a site is “link quality” or not?
I’m definitely open to suggestions and am implementing new ideas all the time. The best thing I’m learning is that there are so many opinions out there about what works and what doesn’t. It seems like the old cliche “Moderation in all things!” fits here too: focusing all your efforts on just one thing, be it PageRank, Cache or whatever else, is not a balanced, most effective attack.
Thanks for the information you provide!