How can a PR 1 site with 3 yahoo BL`s beat a PR 3 site with 43 Yahoo BL`s ??

by jimkirk1943

Posted: 14 years ago 13 replies

Hi Guys,
Just have to ask this question, Today i was checking out the top 10 comp in google for a keyword, i had firefox seo 4 running and as i was checking down the top ten

I saw at number 7 was a site page rank 1, nine yahoo page links and age 2006

But at number 8 was a site page rank 3, forty three yahoo page links and age 2004

I looked at both site and the didnt look like any more on page seo in one than the other ! So just want is it that gave the weaker site a spot above the stronger one ?? I have notcied this so so many times and it just bugs me i cannot understaand it !!

Any ideas guys ??

Cheers Jim

#beat #bl`s #site #yahoo

Paul Roekle 14 years ago

Perhaps the content was updated sooner on one site. Or maybe the site is generally more relevant to the keyword. It's really hard to say - Google is mysterious sometimes :-)
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669073].message }}

Neromancer

14 years ago

I think it is always relevancy - and of course the strength and
power of their back links in relation to what is being searched for

-Google is focused on BOTH, so at least the algorithmic adjustment
(for this month lol) makes it so -

Frequent updates to content seem to drive this up as well . . .

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Click Below To Order Ebook Creation Or Package:
Click here to fill out this simple form

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669089].message }}

jimkirk1943

14 years ago

I looked at the backlinks on the pr1 site and there no more powerful than the 40+ on the pr 3 site, i guess it must be updated content but i just see this so many times it mess`s with my head when i`m trying to workout the top ten comp for a keyword.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669103].message }}

Paul Roekle

14 years ago

Originally Posted by jimkirk1943

These sites don't sound very hard to beat. Just follow proper SEO procedures and I'm sure you will be up there in no time

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669117].message }}

jimkirk1943 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Paul Roekle

These sites don't sound very hard to beat. Just follow proper SEO procedures and I'm sure you will be up there in no time

Hi paul,
Yes your right these sites dont seem to hard to beat but i`ve been trying out a few ideas about how to get on page one without backlinks and just checking the comp in the top ten and things like this just but me off balance, coz the links in that pr1 site are just as crappy as the 40 + in the pr3 they both look like blog comments i haven`t checked them out farther than yahho SE
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669140].message }}

Mohammad Afaq 14 years ago

It's not just backlinks. Google is becoming more and more sophisticated.

It is also possible that the content of the site is more relevant,

or maybe it's a result of Google's Personalized Search.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

â€œThe first draft of anything is shit.â€ ~Ernest Hemingway
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669096].message }}
- rosetrees 14 years ago
  
  Did the newer site have more relevant domain name? In my experience that can make a big difference.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669098].message }}
simpleonline1234 14 years ago

that normally is because those 40 something backlinks are junky links that have low relevance to the sites main theme keyword and or Google doesn't see those links as one way anchor text backlinks but maybe two-way links...you can slap up a million crappy backlinks that have nothing to do with your site and Google is going to give you what you deserve in terms of importance.

Check the other sites backlinks for quality and PR and such and I'll bet those few backlinks are from a strong quality site and is highly relevant to the other sites keywords.
- Thanks
Signature
Check out deals
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669100].message }}
Matt Bard 14 years ago

The backlinks must be relevant as well. It's no longer just a matter of getting high ranking backlinks. The backlinks must be from relevant sites.

Wedding site A gets 43 links from all over the web and Wedding site B gets 8 links from related authority sites such as "Flowers", "Tuxedo Rentals", "Event Planners"...you get the idea.

Wedding site B could very well beat out A.

Matt
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669108].message }}
- jimkirk1943 14 years ago
  
  [QUOTE=Matt Maiden;1669108]The backlinks must be relevant as well. It's no longer just a matter of getting high ranking backlinks. The backlinks must be from relevant sites.
  
  Wedding site A gets 43 links from all over the web and Wedding site B gets 8 links from related authority sites such as "Flowers", "Tuxedo Rentals", "Event Planners"...you get the idea.
  
  Wedding site B could very well beat out A.
  
  Matt
  Hi matt, well ok yeah i guess if your talking about real authorty site backlinks then that site would beat the other but do your really think that relevent sites matter if the links are just coming from relevent blogs or web2,0 sites ??
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669129].message }}
  
  Matt Bard 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by jimkirk1943
  
  ...do your really think that relevent sites matter if the links are just coming from relevent blogs or web2,0 sites ??
  
  Google has been trying to make the entire chain of links around a site relevant.
  
  The links leading out and the links leading in are all ultimately important to the user experience. Google has been trying to make sure that when they send you from their search to a site that anything you do on that site is relevant.
  
  Now I'm not talking about keyword anchor text stuffing which is what people have been doing with backlink building.
  
  43 anchor links that all say "dog grooming" leading back to your "dog grooming" site is where everyone is at now.
  
  But Google has always been trying to stay one step ahead of "stuffing" tactics.
  
  The example above with 43 anchor links is a form of "keyword stuffing".
  
  Now if you get 3 backlinks from "dog grooming" 4 from "grooming shears" 2 from "muzzle" 1 from "nail clippers" and these sites had a higher than average PR you would probably do better.
  
  Or at least that is where they (Google) are heading.
  
  They already know that we can go auto-submit our site to a hundred Web 2.0 bookmarks. They want to get away from giving credit for that crap.
  
  Matt
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669161].message }}
  
  JohnMcCabe 14 years ago
  
  If the two sites are that close in content, on-page SEO, etc., I'd wager that there's more in play than just the number of links (says Captain Obvious).
  
  Authority of the sites sending the links, even the authority of the sites linking to those sites, and so on... could be a factor. So could a hundred other factors.
  
  If you could engineer rankings simply by manipulating the linking arithmetic, we'd be back in the bad old days when SEO meant putting a hot key phrase at the bottom of your page a thousand times in the same color as your background, regardless if it was relevant to the actual page content.
  
  I've started seeing ads for software that will set up profile spamming campaigns. There is software that will post to blogs and 2.0 properties. What gets automated, gets abused. What gets abused, gets devalued.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1669527].message }}
kwality 14 years ago

The newer site might have stronger backlinks. Plus they might be mor onsite optimized.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1671853].message }}

How can a PR 1 site with 3 yahoo BL`s beat a PR 3 site with 43 Yahoo BL`s ??

Trending Topics

Infographic: How B2B marketers on LinkedIn can maximise their efforts for better audience reach

Any thoughts on golf's latest phenom...Scottie Scheffler??

What's the Best IM-Related Skill to Learn Today That Can Help in the Future?

best high quality crypto traffic.

Some interesting stats about brand comms