I've never believed in the panda hype, & PR is Rank, has nothing to do with the rest of the site or TLD (Top Level Domain).

Myself, unless those pages on-page seo is 100% targeting your exact keyword, I would skip paying for a PR0 backlink. You can get PR0 backlinks for free all day long.

Yep agree. The thing is that many of these sites and pages either target keywords I specifically want to optimize for completely, or they are pretty closely related.... that is the thing that is making me wonder. Otherwise, I agree.

I just got the pricing, $5 per month for keyword anchor text in article for PageRank 0 sites and $10 per month for PageRank 1-2 sites.

High? Low?

Page rank is an exponential scale.

So a PR 4 site is not just twice as good as a PR 2 site, it is more like 50 to 100 times more powerful.

PR 0's are the bottom of the line, and it is quite easy to get 1000's of these type of links. However, the question remains... what is better? A thousand PR 0's or 10 PR 4's.

In my opinion, the 10 PR 4's would be of much greater value.

That being said, if you wanted to use the service, I would recommend going for the $10 per month service. I consider it much more than twice as valuable as the PR 0 service. This price doesn't seem to bad at all actually if you are getting 1000's of links.

There are still of course many other unknown variables to consider.

If you are getting link from PR0 relevant site and from quality content site than it's more powerful than any PR4+ unrelevant site. It's my personal experience.

PR0's don't mean that they are worthless completely, they could mean that Google hasn't updated the PR toolbar for that given page.

Now if you visit the homepage and its also a PR0, its a waste of time. Maybe it'll be worth something in the long run, but I wouldn't bother with it right now.

Realistically though, I'll overlook the PR0's simply because there are better hanging fruit out there with proven PR.

OK thanks guys. I think I can push the price down on the PageRank 0 sites. If I can get them for say, $3 a month and they are anchor text links right from the content, is it worthwhile? Or, as some have said, should I just skip 0 PageRank sites completely?

We had tons of PR0 sites linking to us. We were a PR2...now a PR1. I wouldn't recommend it.

Any link that sends targeted traffic is a good link. Who cares about PR? You can't pay the bills with PR.

Besides it's very common for a list of links on a Google Search to return 10 sites with varying degrees of Page Rank for the search query.

The bigger question here is you seem to want to know if these links will boost your rankings.

And that brings up a second question which is what are you telling Google about your site if a massive amount of incoming links are coming from pages they place little value on?

You can not undo a footprint.

There is this mistaken belief that it takes massive links to rank. You don't need that.

You need links that are of high quality.

Thanks InternetMarketingIQ, you are right that I am not interested in links for traffic, but ranking better for keywords we are targeting with our own content.

That said, I am aware that higher Page Rank links would be better, and quality should trump quantity. But, I also believe that if sites have a natural distribution of links, then one would assume that you would very likely have many more low to no PR inbound links than PR 7 links. Or, am I wrong there?

Having only a handful of PR 7+ links seems to be just as bad as 10,000 PR 0 links, no?

So, the idea here is for us to lease a large number of low to no PR links that are super contextual, coupled with strategic leasing of much higher PR sites. But, only if the PR 0 links have enough value to justify the $3 a month leasing fee per link I think I can get.

The question here is not if quality is better than quantity, it is rather if in creating a natural distribution of links, do PR 0 sites have value if the inbound link is contextually relevant, and if so, how much value.

Make sense?

Thanks!

they are definitely worth something - the only question is how much?

If you have a automated way of getting backlinks then it's a game of numbers.

if they have little OB links then they are worth more.

also a relevant niche is worth more - much more - as someone mentioned above.

If you're interested, here's a related thread I started about valuing links and comparing them to others of various PR:

Link Valuation Technique - PageRank Table

Well, I definitely wouldn't pay for a PR0, but if they are free, I would say go for them, as they certainly wouldn't hurt.

A link is a link. If it is a PR 0 it can only go up right? Just don't pay for them.

But getting in-context, anchor text links from related niche sites, even PR 0 is very hard to do for free, maybe impossible?

Sure, getting out of context links on PR 0 sites, or footer links, etc. is easy to get for free, but links from within articles related to our niche with anchor text - how to get this for free?

Surely it is worth something? Or, maybe not.

I disagree.

Low PageRank / PR links can make a massive difference if created correctly.

We manage a 10,000+ domain private blog network with 100,000 pieces of original content that we have produced entirely in house over three years. We then built a platform that enables us to run sophisticated contextual link building campaigns across it. All sites are low page rank as the entire network is 100% white hat and safe by design because our high end clients demand this. No page rank manipulation at all.

We selectively lease links to large publishers and agencies. They are extremely satisfied, but our service is not for the small buyer.

Suffice to say, in-context PR 0 links can work tremendously well when spread uniquely across a large corpus of TLDs.

Good luck.