Page Rank Update Megathread (update 31.12.2009)

  • phaugh
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 796

Post 3+ Months Ago

but PR hasn't changed...yet....and will always be PR...unless they get rid of it or make it useless...links can be bought or developed beteen your own sites. For a small fee I can buy a few unique IP addresses upload 1000's of pages and link them to what ever I want....
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

  • Axe
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 5739
  • Loc: Sub-level 28

Post 3+ Months Ago

*sigh*... you just don't get what I'm trying to say... never mind.
  • rtchar
  • Expert
  • Expert
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 606
  • Loc: Canada

Post 3+ Months Ago

OK ... time for a referee :lol:

I think you guys are arguing opposite sides of the same coin...

I agree that Google is NOT trying to protect my backlinks ... and I agree that PR is a bit skewed.

I don't think it is a complete failure on Google's part. They started showing low PR backlinks back in the June update. So this is just a continuation.

I also think PR was getting a little skewed when no one would link to a site with less than PR-4, because everyone "knew they didn't count". This was leading to a situation where a few sites were providing most of the links. Giving rise to link farms, PR for sale, and a host of other schemes to pervert the system.

Google's response ... first (in June) devalue PR making more PR-4 and PR-5 sites available --- a simple adjustment of the logarithmic scale. Then (in July) make it known that ALL links are used by showing MORE low value back links.

That is exactly what I would do in their situation.
  • phaugh
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 796

Post 3+ Months Ago

"They might care if they've seen a huge load on their servers now that there's a PR checksum code out there for the masses"...no no I get it...I'm just board waiting for an update....sorry
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

Axe sorry chum I agree with what your saying but rtchar has a point. Now days the best SEO people ignore PR and concentrate on getting inbound links from unique IPs. If you look at site pages with high PR they could be over inflated cos the inbound links of that page come from only 1 IP address.

The days of buying a footer to thousands of pages of one site is thankfully dying and as each Google update passes Unique IP's are given more and more value over non.

You may not see it now but I can show you some evidance if you wish. Next year you will definitely see the effect!
  • rtchar
  • Expert
  • Expert
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 606
  • Loc: Canada

Post 3+ Months Ago

If Google did not want you to use the checksum code they could very easily change the formula ...

Quote:
Periodically, the Google Toolbar contacts our servers to see if you are running the most current version. If necessary, we will automatically provide you with the latest update to the Google Toolbar.


I think it serves a purpose to let it continue. Why not let thousands of programmers have access to page rank and see what innovative tools can be developed with this information?
  • Axe
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 5739
  • Loc: Sub-level 28

Post 3+ Months Ago

Johan007 wrote:
The days of buying a footer to thousands of pages of one site is thankfully dying and as each Google update passes Unique IP's are given more and more value over non.

Unique IP addresses or Unique hostnames? I highly doubt Google would penalize hundreds of thousands of websites simply because they are on shared hosting, and another website may resolve to the same IP.
  • phaugh
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 796

Post 3+ Months Ago

"Unique IP addresses or Unique hostnames? I highly doubt Google would penalize hundreds of thousands of websites simply because they are on shared hosting, and another website may resolve to the same IP."...they talked about this at the SEO conference in Europe this year...Axe is right.....I'll try to find the article.
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

Axe wrote:
Unique IP addresses or Unique hostnames? I highly doubt Google would penalize hundreds of thousands of websites simply because they are on shared hosting, and another website may resolve to the same IP.


IP’s are used instead of domains to prevent you making multiple domains on a server at little cost.

No one is penalised just devalued over unique class C IP addresses from all the linking sites. The more unique Class C IP addresses that point to a page the higher it will rank.

Eg1: One page on your site is linked to by 1000 high PR pages that also from your website (or IP)... will not rank as well as another with page with loads of unique IP’s linking to it.

Eg2. You have a page and another site links to you in the footer of every page (giving you a huge PR of say 7) but it can be beaten by a PR6 (maybe even 5) site that has links from loads of deferent IP’s.

Another way to look at is links from the same IP are treaded with similar power to internal links.
  • madmonk
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • madmonk
  • Posts: 2115
  • Loc: australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

google emphasis on IP has been mentioned beefore. I agree with axe. -

seriously doubt that it is possible to base the importance of sites on their IPs. what wil happen to site developers n their clients websites :?: if google does this..
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

All the design site and client sites will still hold value just not as much as they would if the links are from unique IP’s. The PR of these design site and clients would stay the same. That’s why lower PR sites often beat high PR sites with similar on page optimisation and link text!

This is hard for people to accept because I have argued this point many times on forums and don’t want to make enemies with the nice community Ozzu has. I just like to warn people and at least accept it as a possibility.
  • madmonk
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • madmonk
  • Posts: 2115
  • Loc: australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

yep I agree that this is a possibility and we are open to healthy discussions :-)
  • phaugh
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 796

Post 3+ Months Ago

This information you are talking about is old...due to the recent shortage of IP addresses many companies have switched to virutal hosting....where hundreds on sites sit on the same IP...it does not mean that they are owned by the same person just hosted on the same server...no different than unique IP's.

Form Craig Silverstien Google Director of Technology : "Why in this day and age does google continue to penalize sites that are virtual hosted? With ip addresses becoming harder to get/justify every day why does google discount the relevance of links that don't come from a unique ip address. Please don't just deny it, I think the Internet community deserves an explanation.

Craig:

I can't just deny it? What are my other choices? [:)] Actually, Google handles virtually hosted domains and their links just the same as domains on unique IP addresses. If your ISP does virtual hosting correctly, you'll never see a difference between the two cases. We do see a small percentage of ISPs every month that misconfigure their virtual hosting, which might account for this persistent misperception--thanks for giving me the chance to dispel a myth! "
Complete article: http://interviews.slashdot.org/intervie ... 2239.shtml
  • rtchar
  • Expert
  • Expert
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 606
  • Loc: Canada

Post 3+ Months Ago

Nice come back phaugh ... Always nice when somebody busts another Google myth. :lol:

I have also seen studies from one of those SEO newsletters that proved virtual hosting had no effect on PR or search results. Guess I don't have to go looking. :)
  • phaugh
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 796

Post 3+ Months Ago

thanks!

My only fear is that I have no idea how to make sure my host is configuring the virtual hosting correctly.....anyone know how to check it?

I haven't had any problems passing links and PR from my sites but it would be nice to be sure it's being done correctly.
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

rtchar wrote:
Nice come back phaugh ... Always nice when somebody busts another Google myth. :lol:


Ouch! :(

Good point but you are comparing apples with pears.

I did not say domains hosted on the same IP has less value or greater. Why would it that would be stupid I have many of my own sites on the same IP. The comments regarding web hosts was said because I stupidly presumed some one was talking about them being interlinked.

I said inbound links are given greater priority in ranking if they from unique Ip’s and this is honestly true.
  • madmonk
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • madmonk
  • Posts: 2115
  • Loc: australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

nice point abt the virtual hosting mate!

btw johan007, can you show me linky of what you are saying here..

I luv to read on them. :-)
  • rtchar
  • Expert
  • Expert
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 606
  • Loc: Canada

Post 3+ Months Ago

Quote:
can you show me linky of what you are saying here


Yeah Johan007, I would like to see the authority (quote, study, proof) for what you you are saying too. Where did you get this info?

Quote:
inbound links are given greater priority in ranking if they from unique Ip’s


I have not seen any evidence of this in my sites. Some of my sites are interlinked (with few external backlinks) and they still get good PR and rank well in searches.
  • phaugh
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 796

Post 3+ Months Ago

"I said inbound links are given greater priority in ranking if they from unique Ip’s and this is honestly true."..yes you are absolutely correct....sorry I miss understood...but we did get some good in fo on virtual hosting in the process....so all is well.

To confirm your quote I use 2 different hosts for my sites and get a big boost when I link from one to the other vs. linking from sites on the same server....especially when I only link one way....and don't recip back.
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

Let me start from the beginning.

You know Google Ranks web results on many factors and the most powerful of them all are the number of back links (the other being the link text).

If the back links all come from the same IP address it will still rank with loads of PageRank but not as well as a page that is linked from multiple IP addresses.

A good forum for this is...
http://www.v7n.com/forums/

phaugh wrote:
To confirm your quote I use 2 different hosts for my sites and get a big boost when I link from one to the other vs. linking from sites on the same server....especially when I only link one way....and don't recip back.

Yeah its a positive thing however IMO only ads 1 more IP address.
  • madmonk
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • madmonk
  • Posts: 2115
  • Loc: australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

hi there, an article/study on what you have claimed about different IP will be beneficial and good reading...

you gave a linky of a forum.

sorry mate, I have read some myths and bad sources on seo before and
it confused me a great deal. bad start.

any better linky ?
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

No authorities articles have been published on the topic that I know of. All I can say is it is the real reason for the “Sandbox” effect.

The examples I have are personal to me and others - sorry.

I rather not discuss any more on this topic as it could harm my relationship with this excellent forum. Feel free to carry on without me.
  • rtchar
  • Expert
  • Expert
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 606
  • Loc: Canada

Post 3+ Months Ago

Johan007

Don't take it personal, we are looking for the truth just like you.

I am sure that you don't have to worry about hurting anyone's feelings around here. I have made MORE than my share of apologies :)

I do know myself and others on this forum, try to bust many of the Google myths that are circulating in many of the lesser forums. :lol:

Here is some excerpts from a related study that hit my mailbox some time ago ...

Quote:
Do Static IP Sites Rank Higher?
by Jon Ricerca
http://www.SearchEngineGeek.com

Some SEOs theorize that your choice of dedicated hosting
vs. shared hosting might affect your rankings. Some others
claim that is ridiculous because all hosting will
eventually be shared in order to preserve IP addresses.
Which are correct?

I decided to run it through our statistical analysis
engine to get the facts. Here is the methodology I used to
answer this question. I gathered the results of the
queries naturally performed last month by myself and three
associates using Yahoo and Google. I then pinged each site
to get it's IP address. I then tried to visit the site
using the IP address. With shared hosting, this isn't
possible. You get some kind of generic page instead of the
specific site you want. I tallied my results for each of
the first eight rankings.

http://www.SearchEngineGeek.com/graphs/de05.gif

First, it is interesting to note that the number of sites
using shared vs. dedicated hosting is just about half and
half. We expect that as time goes on, more and more sites
will be using shared hosting.

Conclusion:

Sites using static hosting do not rank significantly
higher or lower than sites using shared hosting on both
Yahoo and Google.

  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

Yeah that was a stupid myth.

I am trying to find alternative evidence to prove the inbound link theory but with so many variables its proving to be a bit difficult.

On thing I did two months ago was set up a page for the term “Further Education Jobs”. The top page I had to beet had only had 10 inbound links all from unique IP’s (so did most of the others). I set about trying to beat that site with 300 inbound links from only 2 IP addresses. I only made it onto the second page - just. My page even had a PR of 6 and on page optimisations.
  • darksat
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 487
  • Loc: London (via the rest of the world)

Post 3+ Months Ago

Exactly what is the criteria.
Is it different IPs or IP ranges??
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

Deferent Class C IP's I believe (IP ranges) making it expensive for spammers.

I am NOT saying that same IP defferant domain inbound links structure is being penalised (cos we could do it to a competitor) but dealt in a similar way as internal site links.

The theory being that SEOPeople/Spammers cant just point loads of deferent URL at a site (Though it still works to a degree it slowly being phased out but the most significant drop was during the "Sand Box" time I think in December. There are loads of misleading theories for Sandbox).

There are 3 major variables in ranking:

1. Number unique IP’s linking to it
2. PageRank shown on toolbar (number based on the PR of all inbound links)
3. Link Text
  • madmonk
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • madmonk
  • Posts: 2115
  • Loc: australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

Like what rtchar had said, we are looking for truth.
I first started reading seo on some misleading sites and thos sites got me concepts real messed up. Thats why I am taking a pinch of what I read now. no hard feelings! :-)

I have suspected that different ips make a difference in google before. like yrself. The only way to check if this is a myth or not, was to check it out with guys with tons of sites. ... to see if having different ips will affect sites n link exchanges..

I did just that (asked my web host, Axe n a couple of other friends abt this) and it seems that having sites on same ip has not affected the sites/link exchanges. in regards to google of cuz..

after verification with a few others, I am pretty well assured that having sites on same ip will not affect the sites at all.

.....my rationale coming up....
web design companies will be in for a fair bit of work if google value sites of same ip less...I don suppose google will do that either.

personal servers n ip will be at disadvantage if google does that.
  • Johan007
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1080
  • Loc: Aldershot, UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

No problem but I have never written anything about what is in your rationale. I agree with your rationale. As long as you understand I am talking about something deferent here we are cool.
  • madmonk
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • madmonk
  • Posts: 2115
  • Loc: australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

yep I see what you are saying.. :-)
  • rtchar
  • Expert
  • Expert
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 606
  • Loc: Canada

Post 3+ Months Ago

Well Johan007 ... it appears the latest newsletter agrees with you :)

Quote:
Currently the biggest factor in Google's search relevancy is getting many keyword rich links from a large variety of C block IP addresses. Getting a bunch of links from a single source is easy. Getting links from many different sources is much more time consuming and expensive.


Full article at http://www.webpronews.com/ebusiness/seo/wpn-4-20040730PageRankaTrueCommodity.html

But again no authorities, studies or Google quotes ... do You believe him?
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 740 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
 

© 1998-2014. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.