Does the number of pages you have in your domain determine a factor in SEO?

So you mean we agree Expat?

And I meant that Nohaber implies SEO is just to do with Google by saying PR is the most important factor. That would mean SE's without PR can not be optimized for which is rubbish.

I've checked your sites before, seems very similar to our Natural Stuff shop product-wise though in a non-competitive manner. Good stuff.

 

expat,
how do you know that the sites in your example are REALLY having PR 0? I don't think the PR on the toolbar is the real one.

People, have been optimizing successfully before even they heard about PR. It does not mean that PR is not the most important factor.

Useless? Hmm. Why don't you make a very informative site about Google and then rank #1 for Google without having PR10? If you do it, I'll take all my words back.

Because, in the future this page might have PR of 4, 5 or more.

That's because computer can't reflect on content

 

Thats the chicken and the egg problem again. And I believe you have it wrong.

PR is not the means to the result of high ranking, it is a result of accumulating tons of links. A side-effect. Positive if you like PR, useless if you're not interested in it. But it won't hurt you.

So what happens if I take up the challenge of getting a page rank #1 for 'Google'...

I create a nice page, on-page SEO done well including (oh ooohh! leaking bleeding) OBL's.

Then I start getting back links. At least match Google: 1,360,000 linking to http://www.google.com but better be to have more. I don't care about PR, I won't even look at PR of linking pages just for the sake of the challenge. I get 2 million links and one day I will be #1 and yes i will have high PR! Yes probably 10! But I'm not #1 BECAUSE of PR10. I'm #1 because of 2 million IBLs.

Side effect: PR=high, quite possibly 10.

 

Didn't know we disagreed. Just had a good enough example at hand.....

Except I'm not so sure about simple back links. It is simply to easy.
Yes it takes a bit of time but with a range of sites allowing "linked themes" like travel - travel insurance - insurance - health insurance - health - travel health -travel it is easier.
Also the litle example site doesn't have many links but hapily outperforms BBC with tons of links.

What I find hard is to make people understand is triangular linking and context (page / site) driven links.


And to answer the q fron NOHABER
how do you know they have 0? That's not the point.

If a home page has 6 a contentpage barely 3 and a resource page 0 or 1 I simply regard the sitestructure as crap. Or translated in my language the home page is all there is, content pages just hold blurb to have some more pages but it's not really worth anything and resources/links well they are just bolted on.

M

 

You can get 2 million PR0 links that would never get even crawled
A PR10 page can be acheived by just a couple of very high PR links. That's the beauty of PR. PR guarantees quality; # of links does NOT.

Read Google's original paper, read all the follow-up interviews, patents, papers etc. from Google and if you really understand it, you'll repeat after me: "PageRank is the most important factor". There's an upper limit to on-page + anchor text optimization (IR score), but the sky is the limit (or the number of all pages on the web) for PageRank

btw. ping me when you outrank Google

Or to generalize, link popularity is the most important factor for any decent competitive search engine.

 

So how important will it be if indeed Stanford still holds the patent on PR and Google is out there on their own? Your whole ideas will go out of the window and you can get paranoid on the next new hype. Good luck to you.

 

I doubt they'd give it away like that if indeed, and I think you are right, it can keep so many SE's quiet. They'll know they own a quality and protected bit of technology so unless they are stupid I can't see them separating from it that easily.