View Full Version : Traffic and PR connection
Janna122003
11-16-2007, 01:37 PM
I believe that there is no direct connection between Traffic and PR.
Since Backlinks= Traffic and Backlinks = PR
High traffic doesn't necessary means that you can have high PR. What is your opinion on this SEO expert?
Dan01
11-16-2007, 02:52 PM
I would bet there has to be some sort of weight given to traffic. I think quality inbound links would be more important though.
AussieWebmaster
11-16-2007, 03:44 PM
Google has yet to include traffic numbers in any measurement for PR or SERP algo
Yeah... I can't see traffic alone as a good measurement because it could be the result of spam and not relevancy. :)
Dan01
11-16-2007, 06:18 PM
Google has yet to include traffic numbers in any measurement for PR or SERP algo
Besides inbound links and keywords, what do you think Google considers?
Besides inbound links and keywords, what do you think Google considers?
PR, site extension, rate at which new pages are added, verification, anchor text, organization of content, frequency of updates, age of site, link popularity, relevance, historical performance and server issues just to name a few.
Dan01
11-16-2007, 10:27 PM
But traffic plays absolutely no role in PR? With all of those variables, I would think they would consider traffic. I have not seen the algorithm.
But traffic plays absolutely no role in PR? With all of those variables, I would think they would consider traffic.
Google considers a number of factors and PageRank is one factor. PageRank uses link structure to determine the value of pages but it does not consider traffic.:)
PageRank relies on the uniquely democratic nature of the web by using its vast link structure as an indicator of an individual page's value...
http://www.google.com/technology/
Dan01
11-17-2007, 03:07 AM
Beu, thanks for the link and I have a comments / points here. I didn't see where it said that traffic was not a factor. I also didn't see anything about:
site extension, rate at which new pages are added, verification, anchor text, organization of content, frequency of updates, age of site, link popularity, relevance, historical performance and server issues just to name a few.
I am not saying you and AussieWebmaster are wrong, but this is the first time I heard anyone say that they were sure that traffic was not involved in PR.
I can understand why it would not play a role in the SEPR. I bet PR plays a role in the SEPR. "Google combines PageRank with sophisticated text-matching techniques to find pages that are both important and relevant to your search."
But maybe traffic should not play a role (and maybe you are right). For instance, the NY Times probably gets more traffic than the House of Representaitves. So if someone typed in "House of Representatives", they don't want the NY Times to pop up on top.
Where have you heard that traffic was involved in PR? Just so we are clear my list includes PR because it was in response to the question "what does Google consider".
Marcia
11-17-2007, 03:03 PM
There are over 200 factors used in scoring, and usage statistics *might* be some (plural - not just one thing) of the factors, but it hasn't been proven or confirmed. There is a patent out there on it and I've suspected that traffic level might be connected to "sandbox" duration (again, no proof).
But it wouldn't be PR, which is a different type of calculation that's link based.
Dan01
11-17-2007, 07:55 PM
Beu, I can't remember where I read this. It was years ago. My wife and I put some article up just so we get traffic. Other articles we put up to make money. They are very different articles obviously.
For traffic, we put up articles about Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears. For money we put up articles about life insurance and mortgages.
What caught my eye was idea that the posters were sure that traffic played no role in PR. I have never heard that before.
This is the way I thought of things, and your post made that more clear. PR plays a role in SEPR. PR helps determine SEPR.
Yes, I think you have it!:) PR could help increase a page's position in the SERPS and that could result in driving more traffic to said page.
Dan01
11-17-2007, 10:00 PM
I was just talking to my wife about this. For years we both have believed (through our reading) that traffic is a consideration for page rank.
We have had a two prong approach to our business. But if what you say is correct, this would change the way we do things. We could bring our traffic from 10K per day down to 100 per day and have the same PR. I am amazed.
I doubt we will give up on the traffic approach here though. She is not hot on the idea and still remembers reading articles over the years that indicated (obviously none of us have seen the algorithm, but...) traffic played a role in PR.
I don't know what else to say here. Until the other day, I have never heard anyone say traffic was not given any weight.
Dan01
11-17-2007, 10:21 PM
After reviewing Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank
I don't see where traffic matters. In fact, they have very few variables other than inbound links. No wonder link-farms became so popular. I think they should take into account traffic as a weighted criteria.
Yes, inbound links are the key. :)
Old yes but either way, here is the original research paper on PageRank by Larry Page, if you care for more:
http://dbpubs.stanford.edu:8090/pub/1999-66
Marcia
11-18-2007, 01:07 AM
Patent issued Sept. 5, 2002. Go for it, and then tell us what you think:
Methods and apparatus for employing usage statistics in document retrieval (http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220020123988%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20020123988&RS=DN/20020123988)
That doesn't mean that there aren't variables and that they can't tweak the damping factor, or adjust whether or not pages can continue to pass PR and link juice (ref: Matt Cutts on paid links), but ignore published documents and patents at your own risk.
I don't see where traffic matters. In fact, they have very few variables other than inbound links. No wonder link-farms became so popular. I think they should take into account traffic as a weighted criteria.Unfortunately, what we think has little bearing on what they actually do. They have the statistical (and historical) data (whether or not they make proper use of it), and we don't.
beu
Yes, inbound links are the key.Yup! And therein lies their weakness.
Dan01
11-18-2007, 03:34 AM
I agree, that is their weakness.
Beu, I agree that inbound links were are the top criteria for PageRank. In fact, if I remember right, that is what made Google so successful. Other search engines used to use frequency of the search words. This allowed publishers to manipulate the search engines by spamming their pages with those words.
You had a long list of other criteria. I would think traffic would be a better measure (although quality inbound links would trump traffic).
I have a question: Do you think Yahoo, Ask or anyone else includes traffic somewhere in their computation of SEPR?
You had a long list of other criteria. I would think traffic would be a better measure (although quality inbound links would trump traffic).
My list was for ranking factors in the SERPs only and not PR alone. PR is but one factor!
I see how PR could be seen as a weakness but in my opionion, PR is not a weakness because it's scalable and takes the ever expanding size of the web into consideration. At the same time and like Marcia said, what we think has little bearing on what they actually do.
Dan01
11-18-2007, 01:01 PM
Yes, what you and I think may have little bearing on what they actually do. ;) None of us have seen the algorithm. From what you say, the PR is just one narrow measure of SEPR (with lots of other measures - and maybe some we dont't know about). If that is the case, then maybe it is not a weakness, becuase they may consider traffic elsewhere. If they don't, then maybe that is their weakness.