McDar Experiment

They are

PR6 from Shawns tool

They have 39 backlinks

and 2050 pages in the url

 

I think you're spot on with the 'authority' factor being important. Although I'm not too sure it's solely to do with size. In my roughly parallel experiment my new domain places well in the allinanchor: results but nowhere in the SERPs. An 'old' domain totally unrelated to the new domain theme and with only 30 or so pages actually appears in the SERPs for that term because I have placed a link to the new domain on it. It would appear that G has some other hidden factors that define a site's quality/authority irrespective of theming (age, other quality links?). It's a grand old game SEO.

It would be interesting to see how a brand new domain would place in the SERPs for 'sleeping bags' with the same links and anchor text but without the 'authority' of Caryl's site behind it.

Mick

 

Foxy,

What site are you referring to?
Also, on the tool, the main site is listed in the description, however, a mouse over will reveal the actual page returned in the results. So, it is the PR of the page returned in the results that is displayed NOT the PR for the main site and links pointing to THAT page that are reported.

 

I'm a little confused by this also - there is only a handful of outbound links from www.komar.org (which is PR7) so you would think there would be SOME passing of PR ... or maybe the fact that there is too many inbound links negates that. Interestingly enough, another outbound link at http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/ doesn't have an PR either.

I guess I was thinking that if you had a limited number of outbound links, then your PR passing to them would be significant, but this suggests I need to clean up a bunch of the inbould links. It is puzzling that with all the links to the sleeping bags page, it has not acquired any page rank.

alek

P.S. A link I just added was to my Lunar Eclipse Pictures so I'm curious to see how this does. BTW, the Adsense ads are quite the crack-up on that page - cheap real estate on the moon! ;-)

BTW, there is another lunar eclipse coming up next week that non-USA surfers may be able to see.

 

Quite

But in my view the PR of the "site" [read 1st page] transfers an inherited "authority" to the pages in the site in general so you can see PR0 pages ranking 1 for search phrases.

[The site was outdoorgear]

 

Hi Mick,

I have such a site already. I put it up in January. It has done sooo poooorly, I have just neglected it for now. I use PPC to get traffic to it.

It is small, only 60 pages, PR5, 9 Backlinks, 190 "other links".

It currently does NOT come up in the results for sleeping bags at all.

Your challange sounds interesting, but I don't know if this site is caught up in the "sand box" effect or not.

*Sand Box effect - There have been many reports by webmasters, on many forums, that new sites are NOT getting placement in the serps... Speculation is that Google is imposing some sort of "waiting period..." (a whole nuther topic).

Caryl

 

Foxy,

I think there is merit to what you are saying. There sure seems to be evidence supporting it. BUT, only circumstantial evidence that most likely would be very hard, if not impossible to prove.

Any ideas from anyone as how to test for this?

Caryl

 

Ummmmm ... waiting period, aka sandbox ...

Now if I worked at Google, that WOULD be a smart move, since I lose the "currency effect" (but I have the NEWS link to handle fast breaking stuff), but I gain by making it real difficult to relate cause-effect in SEO .. plus an argument could be made that if something is relevent, it will be relevent a week from now too (for non-breaking-news stuff at least).

alek

 

Alek,

Which comments are you referring to?

 

If you are talking about the experimental page it has a PR5. Where did you get the idea it had PR0?

 

Caryl,

How many visitors have you had from Google since the page started to rank in the top 30 pages? And have you made any sales?

In the end that is what this is all about.

 

WRT sandbox comments: I must have been reading in another forum where they were talking about how Google might delay changes for some period of time to the SERP's.

WRT sleeping bag PR: Yea, I got confused - this is PR5. I'm still puzzled why no PR passed to the Google Compute Page, but then again, it's on the same IP, just different domain, so that may also have an impact.

WRT how many visitors/sales of sleeping bags have been made since the experiment started: GREAT question and one I've been meaning to ask - that IS the bottom line.

alek

 

Alek,
Sorry I missed your post earlier!

I do think that the total number of links (internal and external) come into play here. I can think of no other reason why the link from your page is not showing up.

It's not so much that the page is not passing PR as it is, apparently, not even being counted. (as it does not appear in the backlinks reported by Google this last update)

 

Yea, I saw the "not reported" earlier and have thought about commenting - that's pretty bizzare ... since if you do a back link check on http://www.powder2glass.com/Google_Toolbar_Compute/ you WILL see the back link listed from www.komar.org

I added that just a few days before I did your sleeping bags link, so I wonder if there was some sort of cut-off for back-links that it just missed (?)

alek

 

Alek,

The odd thing is, Foxy added links AFTER yours and the first one did get included in the update.

Caryl

 

Here are the dismal results as has been requested.

Since the page went up, there have been 18 hits from Google for the search sleeping bags

There have been 231 hits to the page itself (probably most as a result of this thread)

Caryl

 

I have ZERO explanation for this - as I said earlier, I assure you there is no cloaking or other monkey business on the link - its just been a plain old HREF since the day I added it.

Is quite odd.

alek

 

Alek,

I did note that the link is totally clean, some time ago, in this thread. It may very well have to do with it's position on your page.

I read a remark somewhere else in this forum about a "50 link/page" theory. I can't find it right now. Mayby Bob remembers something about it.

[edited] Found it! http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=396&highlight=50+links

Although, this was discounted, immediatley in that thread- it may be a topic worth revisiting.

Would your link to the experiment page be counted if you moved it closer to the top of the page?

Would that be looked on as some kind of support for the "50 link theory"?

Idunno...

 

Thanx for the info on the 50-link thing - I'm pretty close to that. WRT "cleanness of link", yes, you did say that earlier and sorry if I came off overly defensive ... I'm just puzzled over it.

alek

 

FYI FWIW Guys: I tidy'ed up the top-level www.komar.org page ... a little (it's still a mess) ... so the total number of HREF's is now 45 with the sleeping bag entry being #37. Just wanted to let you guys know since you are keeping track of things.

Note that we are at halfway point of my one-month "free PR7 link offer" in exchange for people taking a look (and hopefully considering/running) Google Compute along with their Toolbar - as outlined on that page, it's a good cause ... and we just busted into the top-100 within Team Google (out of over 300,000).

So if mcdar wants me to move the location, change anchor text, add titles, etc. of that link, just let me know.

alek