PR in freefall?

[webvicious]

I agree...its shouldnt hurt your own ranking, but losing PR hurts your ability to sell your own links!

[marcel]

I agree...its shouldnt hurt your own ranking, but losing PR hurts your ability to sell your own links!

You could sell links, but your not doing a good service if you sell links based on PR. PR continues to lose value in so many ways.

There are so many metrics that could be used or invented.
Here are some:
Conversion ability
Traffic generation
Pageview generation index

Registration generation

These could be measured by yellow, purple, blue, red or pink toolbars. Alexa and Google don't measure these metrics.

Maybe it's about time a competitor did this. I hope that suggestion inspires someone.

[stymiee]

PR is definitely not an indicator of traffic. Nor is it meant to be.

[gottarelocate]

Do you have a business model for your PR4 and PR5 sites? Perhaps that's the reason why your lesser PR sites are performing better?

[Malatya]

PR is definitely not an indicator of traffic. Nor is it meant to be.

Thanks for reply, yes this is true.But google has changing the algorithm and the search results are generally based on (not totally) pagerank.In future goolge can give adsense comissions by pe (pr3 0.01 pr5 o.2 etc) and i think pagerank is really important.So, google adores the pr and try to destroy link buyers, fakes, etc.I think they will use pr more then today.

[HAWK]

And I think that people will wise up and start paying less attention to PR.

[marcel]

Do you have a business model for your PR4 and PR5 sites? Perhaps that's the reason why your lesser PR sites are performing better?

Clueless guesses...
I tried to limit the details and focus on evidence that PR is not a measurement of anything in particular.

[AJKock]

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here.

If spammy sites pull your content, you still get traffic and links from them, so if they get exposed, you also get hurt because you are "associated with them". True or false?

[optimize]

What makes you think they lost PR because of "Link Sharing"? People just assume it was because of that. Maybe their content got stale, who knows...

Well, as you can see from my post, I am undecided. It's just a possibility and then again there could be other reasons. So, I am not thinking that it's due to link sharing , but interested in knowing the exact reason/s.

[AJKock]

Well as stymiee pointed out rightly so, PR is only about linking. But my question is "How do Google differentiate between intentional and unintentional paid associated links?

[stymiee]

If spammy sites pull your content, you still get traffic and links from them, so if they get exposed, you also get hurt because you are "associated with them". True or false?

They can't hurt you otherwise it would be easy for competitors to use it against you.

[optimize]

Well as stymiee pointed out rightly so, PR is only about linking. But my question is "How do Google differentiate between intentional and unintentional paid associated links?

A simple way that I could think of is to penalize sites that have backlinks from a set of network of websites blacklisted by Google for selling links , but this is mere speculation and if indeed link sharing is the reason , then the method could be more sophisticated.

[Malatya]

And I think that people will wise up and start paying less attention to PR.

we will see it with the new pr update.) It is closer i think.)