I have never believed that Google can take the 3 - 400 MILLION results it gets for a term like Real estate and divide them up into groups of ten for PR of 1 to 10 for all 400 million in any way that makes sense.

So, i did a Google search of the word "New York Barbershop".

There certainly are quite a few. Literally pages worth.

So what does Google rate? The quality of their website? I'm not going there to get my website built .... I'm going to get my hair cut.

And somewhere around the third page or so I saw a poor barbershop that had only been in business for 30 years or so and had a page rank of 0. Why? It was 100% a Barbershop in New York ... it should be a 10! If the site was a donut shop then it should be 0 because it was not what I was looking for.

And webmasters worry about page rank? Why? It's a moronic stupid system that is totally nonsense.

I have a site that is #5 on page one of the G....
#1 in yahoo and bing...
PR....zero.....hmmm...

I heard that Google will replace PR with other tool. I'm waiting for it

READ the stickied thread.

PR is only one of several factors in SERPs.

Toolbar PR is NOT a factor.

1. PR is an extremely important factor in the ranking of a website
2. Toolbar PR is not PR
3. No matter how much PR you have, your site shouldn't rank for subject matter it's not relevant for.

I have never believed that Google can take the 3 - 400 MILLION results it gets for a term like Real estate and divide them up into groups of ten for PR of 1 to 10 for all 400 million in any way that makes sense

Pages for every term are not divided up from 1-10. Keywords or phrases are supposed to be irrelevant to PR, which is only about the number and quality of links pointing at a page. And yes, it is very possible for Google to organize millions or even a billions of results this way. It's what they do. How it is basically accomplished is a matter of public record: Anatomy of a Search Engine (though parts of the original thesis are now outdated).

Originally Posted by Jim Gillum

I have a site that is #5 on page one of the G....
#1 in yahoo and bing...
PR....zero.....hmmm...

Not so new to me. I already experience such things. Sometime Google is really hard to understand.

I am also believing in the google PR . If you get good PR in google then you can rank high with your keyword. You can promote high PR site easily then low PR site.

Page Rank only gives you an idea how many quality links are there on a site.

This is true that only PR can't give you everything..Even Google says not to take it as the only factor for purpose of ranking

PageRank is made out to be some holy grail in SERP. In reality it really is not all that important in regards to SERP. At least that's my view.

A Page Rank is based on individual webpage (not website!) backlinks ALONE.

It seems so sad to know that people keeps on over define PR.

I think what the OP was saying was true though, when you are trying to find a real world business, PR does not always help you, the 30 year old barbershop may not rate better than the one year old one, and it should.

Then again maybe it should rate on the quality of the haircuts or value of the dollar also !

PR may not be perfect, but in general Google is doing a better job than anyone, so unless someone invents something better it is the best we have.

Actually:

Originally Posted by Benmoore47

Page Rank only gives you an idea how many quality links are there on a site.

Chasing "PR" is like chasing the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow

Chasing "PR" is like chasing the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow

Common sense - good to see. I don't worry about PR - I think it's dead anyway.

Google has an exclusive license to use the Pagerank process patent until 2011 (non-exclusive until 2017). If Google planned to extend it's exclusive use of the patent, it would have done so by now and announced it in a prospectus.

It follows that if Google has no plans to extend the license, they would phase out the pagerank process from it's algos before 2011 and substitute it for their own process. Stanford got over 330 million for the Google shares used to pay for the exclusive license to use the Pagerank patent. That's quite a price tag; I feel it's safe to say Google have learned a thing or two about ranking pages and have move away from the 12 year old pagerank process.

I think a far more interesting question to ask is, "Now that Pagerank is dead, has Google replaced it with their own process, or is it an utterly useless trademarked name now?"

Originally Posted by chrishirst

Actually:

Thanks for the correction Chris. You got the point it can be quality or not.