|
View previous topic
::
View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
ngs1
Joined:
10 Oct 2004
Posts:
21
Location:
Auckland, New Zealand
|
Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:31 pm
Post subject:
|
 |
|
The whole point here is that you guys are arguing that pagerank doesn't affect the SERP's. But it does. The very reason you and others are doing well on terms without a focus on pagerank is because they are niche phrases without the competition.
And my comment about optimizing for the term 'microsoft' is not bull. The reason you couldn't win on that phrase is because you don't have the pagerank. And the reason you could win on the phrase 'macrosoft' is because the DIRECT competition doesn't.
Your ref cursor page has a keyword density of 1.86% for the term ref cursor, and well as being optimized around meta tags, link anchor text, etc.
The microsoft page has a 0.57% keyword density for that term, and I'll bet that they haven't done anything else in terms of SEO to get their position at number 43. I absolutely guarantee that if all they did was add the words 'ref cursor' a few more times in their sample code like you have, and perhaps a tweak or two to their inbound anchor text, they would instantly occupy a permanent position at number one that no mortal could possibly beat.
But I think you are safe. Because Microsoft don't have any interest in trying to beat you on that term because it's just a support page for them. They know that their customers will find it anyway, and they have no further monetisation possible on that page. |
|
| Back to top |
  |
 |
DatabaseDesigner
Joined:
17 Nov 2003
Posts:
665
Location:
Norway
|
Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:53 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
Then I invite you to take the test:
Search term/Hits/My placement
Ref cursor / 87.900 pages / I'm no.1
database design ebooks/ 328.000 / I'm no. 1 and 2
candidate keys / 370.000 / I'm no.1 reprints are no. 2 and 5
important database design / 5.280.000 / I'm no. 7 and 8 (hate that  )
I actually have thousands of similar, important phrases.
Do I need to go on 
ngs1; your argument; that MS is not paying attention to it is good enough for me. Just shows that targeted content always beats PR 
The reason it is difficult to outrank 'Microsoft' is that it is a trademark, repeated all over the place.
BTW: I really enjoyed the American commercial of a BMW cabriolet, saying :
"Our hardware runs better without Windows"
I run a BMW
_________________
DatabaseDesigner
The complete guide to eBooks!
http://www.databasedeasign-resource.com |
|
| Back to top |
 |
|
ngs1
Joined:
10 Oct 2004
Posts:
21
Location:
Auckland, New Zealand
|
Posted: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:35 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
Do you know that the when Google shows you the number of pages found to contain your search it says nothing about whether those terms have been targeted or whether they've just been found floating around in random pages that are focussed on different topics? Take your last phrase 'important database design'. At first glance you might think "Wow, there are 5,280,000 pages on the internet for this phrase, I must be doing so well!" But all this means is that there are 5,280,000 pages that have 'important', 'database', and 'design' SOMEWHERE on their page and not necessarily as one string. In fact if you put it in quotes then it comes up with a different number: 105.
This is the number of pages that have all three words in a row.
Overture searches done in September: (Overture is statistically a bit skewed but it serves as a guide)
Ref Cursor 107
Database design ebooks Nothing recorded
Candidate keys 271
important database design Nothing recorded
So: important database design has 105 pages competing. And there are statistically so few searches per month that it completely falls below overture's radar. Of course pagerank isn't going to play a factor in ranking well on this term.
You'd hardly call these high traffic phrases. Of course it's going to be easy to pick up the breadcrumbs that are left scattered. And I don't doubt for one minute that with enough breadcrumbs you can eat a substantial meal. That is the philosophy that Ken Evoy promotes with SBi.
Now you take my challenge: For this I have chosen some terms with substantial traffic:
Phrase/Searches In Overture/Lowest Pagerank on 1st SERP/
Computer Equipment/50493/PR 5
Gateway Computer/49732/PR 4 (but the top 3 are PR 7 followed by a 6)
Computer Internet Security/45438/PR 5 (but the rest of the top 6 are PR 7)
Now let's get more niche along the lines of what you've been targeting:
Computer Recording Equipment/64/PR 3 (btw the PR 0 in 1st place simply means that google hasn't updated the PR that they release to the public, it doesn't mean that there is no pagerank for that page)
Business Computer Equipment/118/PR 2
Wholesale Computing Equipment/120/PR 2
Computer Equipment Sales/141/PR 2
Now can you see why you may have mistakingly thought that Google doesn't use pagerank to position results? It's just that for the terms you've been targeting it's not relevant.
It doesn't mean that it's not relevant for the terms that have higher levels of traffic. In fact it is for those terms that pagerank becomes absolutely essential to rank well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
robertb
Joined:
09 Aug 2003
Posts:
1837
Location:
Columbus, OH
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:47 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
I just read through this all.....geesssh.
Sounds like some people have too much free time on their hands. Go write some articles or get some link partners!
_________________
Robert
Instant Site Comments - Allow Visitors to Comment On Your Content!
EbookNiches.com - 4 PLR Ebook Packages Each Month
Learn About DropShipping |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Voasi
Joined:
22 Dec 2003
Posts:
903
Location:
California, The OC
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:15 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | In fact it is for those terms that pagerank becomes absolutely essential to rank well. |
You talk as though PageRank is something you can go out and get. Rather it is just a mathimatical equation derived by the process of achieving incoming links.
Like I said before, PageRank is a result of SEO, but is in no way something you DO to help your rankings in the search engines. You DO on-page optimization. You DO link exchanges. You DO write content (not very grammatical there  ). You ACHIEVE pagerank.
It boils down to anchor text with your IBL's (InBound Links) for targeting keyword phrases. That is why a PR 3 can destroy a PR7 in Google's SERPS. The PR 3 site will use his/her keyword rich anchor text and achieve top rankings. The PR 7 site may only have just content scattered around their website that is relevant to the search query/keyword.
| Quote: | | Now can you see why you may have mistakingly thought that Google doesn't use pagerank to position results? |
That's because they don't use PageRank.
| Quote: | | Go write some articles or get some link partners! |
Wise words of robertb!  I concur! (go watch "Catch Me If You Can"...good movie! )
P.S. - ngs1, I always like a good debate! 
_________________
2009 Insider Secrets
44 Secret Techniques to Create $2,862,229 a month!
Free Report Here |
|
| Back to top |
 |
|
ngs1
Joined:
10 Oct 2004
Posts:
21
Location:
Auckland, New Zealand
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 5:55 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
I never said pagerank is something you do. Working on establishing quality inbound links is something you do. Over time that helps to build pagerank.
What I said was - pagerank is PART of the google algorithm in determining the ranking of sites.
It's quite simple. Take two pages A & B and the key phrase 'peanut butter egg shells'
Page A is PR 7 and optimized for the term 'peanut butter' which because it is more of a general term attracts more searches.
Page B is PR 3 and optimized for the term 'peanut butter egg shells'
Along comes a surfer and types 'peanut butter egg shells' into Google.
Page B wins over Page A. Not because it's 'whomped' all over page A, but because Page A was not considered as relevant as Page B by the relevance part of the algorithm.
Take example #2:
Page A, PR 7, is about 'peanut butter'. But the author of the page hasn't followed SEO principles.
Page B, PR 3, is also about 'peanut butter'. The author has also carefully approached all the SEO factors he possibly can to optimize around the phrase 'peanut butter'. Thus the relevance algorithm in the search engine determines that this page is a closer match to the topic 'peanut butter'.
The search engine then has to weigh up the two factors: #1 relevance, and #2 the importance of the page. Depending on how much weight it gives to #1 or #2 will determine which one is ranked higher. In a black and white case like this Page B would most likely win because Google gives more weight to relevance and less to the pagerank.
Take example #3
Page A is PR 7 and highly optimized around a highly contested phrase 'search engine optimization'
Page B is PR 3 and highly optimized around the same phrase.
In this case the relevance algorithm determines both pages to be equally relevant. So currently they are tying. Guess what happens next? Google's pagerank algorithm kicks in. And the PR 7 page wins.
Can't you see that these factors interplay with one another?
Yes in many cases pagerank is not the dominant factor in the page that achieved top placement. But you only have to look to the highly contested search terms to see pagerank influencing the results.
"Catch me if you can" was an excellent movie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YC
Joined:
27 Dec 2003
Posts:
26
Location:
Penang, Malaysia
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ngs1
Joined:
10 Oct 2004
Posts:
21
Location:
Auckland, New Zealand
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:11 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
If you don't mind I'd like to draw a metaphor at this stage
In the world of physics once upon a time all we had to explain the laws of motion was Newtonian physics. The revelations that Newton had were monumental and helped to propel us as humans into a new era. But as we became more and more sophisticated it became apparent that although Newton's laws were in practice highly useful we were seeing things that contradicted these simple laws.
The next major step forward was Einsteinian physics. The laws of relativity set forth by Einstein enabled us to reach a greater understanding (although not complete) of the physical universe.
What I'm trying to say here is that what we are doing when we optimize for search engines is we are trying to understand something which is unknown - i.e. the exact mathematical algorithms that the search engines use to position their results. We do this by building a model based on observations, like Newton and Einstein did in trying to create a model of the laws of the universe.
The comments that others have made in this thread are based on their observations and the observations of others. They have created a model of understanding which has proved useful in helping to achieve rankings. It doesn't mean that the model is complete or that it isn't possible to expand on the model.
I have not once said that any of the points that the others consider are important are not. I agree completely that the techniques they are promoting are useful.
Where I disagree is with comments that Pagerank isn't used in ranking sites - with the understanding that depending on the circumstances of the competition it becomes relatively more or less important in the overall algorithm. This understanding is based on observations of the reported PR of sites in the first page of google results for highly contested terms where there is a lot of SEO being implemented.
Now don't get me wrong. If someone can show me why my observation doesn't fit an appropriate model of understanding the ranking of sites by Google, then I will happily concede. Because that will reinforce my knowledge of the search engines and that can only be a positive thing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sicarius
Joined:
15 Jun 2004
Posts:
63
Location:
Seattle
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:31 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
Just based on my personal experience with my dozen or so sites, I concur with ngs1.
And to answer the poor guy's original question, I'd say probably so. It's a little harder to know what Google is up to these days, but in the past I've always seen increases in traffic after pr updates (in which my sites' pr increased). Not right away mind you... more like after the next time the SERPs update which usually doesn't coincide.
Again, this is all only in my experience, and I don't claim to do this on a wide enough scale to really know anything =) I do make a very comfy living from my sites though, if that counts for anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SteveG
Joined:
02 Sep 2004
Posts:
5
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:15 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Sicarius wrote: | Just based on my personal experience with my dozen or so sites, I concur with ngs1.
|
Add me there, too
Btw it really seems some of you guys haven't seen the page:
http://www.google.com/technology/
To make a quick quote:
| Google wrote: |
The heart of our software is PageRank?, a system for ranking web pages developed by our founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin at Stanford University. And while we have dozens of engineers working to improve every aspect of Google on a daily basis, PageRank continues to provide the basis for all of our web search tools.
|
As an interesting thing, I find to be a good strategy to tell others PR doesn't matter while getting you a nice PR in the mean time
Anyway Sean Burns, Allan's favourite SEO also concurs to the importance of PR.
Steve |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Debs
Joined:
16 Aug 2003
Posts:
4296
Location:
NY
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:05 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
I'm not disregarding Pagerank, but I'm not hanging everything on it either. I can't help but think what comes first? PR or links into a site? ... it's the links into a site that build PR so my opinion is links are more important than PR ... so placing emphasis on links in for ranking is more important than what the actual PR of a site is.
We don't know what our actual PR is, we only know a value based on the toolbar which can cover a huge range in each step. It's easier for me to check backlinks and know what I need to rank well than it is to look at a PR number and guess what I need.
Debs
_________________
Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ngs1
Joined:
10 Oct 2004
Posts:
21
Location:
Auckland, New Zealand
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:16 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
Fair enough Deb's!
It's the difference between a more accurate model to explain a phenomenon and a more useful one.
Can we conclude on this note then? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Voasi
Joined:
22 Dec 2003
Posts:
903
Location:
California, The OC
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2004 9:19 pm
Post subject:
|
|
|
I think that is a good note to conclude on!
_________________
2009 Insider Secrets
44 Secret Techniques to Create $2,862,229 a month!
Free Report Here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Debs
Joined:
16 Aug 2003
Posts:
4296
Location:
NY
|
Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:20 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
Sounds good to me too
Debs
_________________
Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flyer
Joined:
29 Sep 2004
Posts:
75
|
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2004 6:21 am
Post subject:
|
|
|
You guys can believe whatever you want, but PR is not that big a factor in how well pages do in Google results.
_________________
Have you seen this bonus offer? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
