SEOGuy's PR Channelling vs usability

After reading SEOGuy's article (http://www.pagerank-search-engine-o...g-pagerank.html) I'm intrigued with this idea, but concerned about the usability from a users standpoint that this would cause.

While good SEO is certainly a concern, I try to design sites with the end users in mind as well. Since some (though certainly not that many) users do not keep JavaScript enabled, wouldn't this method make your site virtually impossible to navigate.

I also worry about users using special browsers for different disabilities, etc.

I'd appreciate any comments and input others have into this issue. I'm working a new site, where this could be useful (not to mention, I "could" rework a few old ones).

Thanks,

Diana

If you don't rank then your site will not be seen by humans. So you have a choice, build a site to rank well or build a site for easy navigation.... but if you are creative you can probably come up with a reasonable middle ground.

Diana, ignore PR Channelling or any other trick. Instead, do what feels right. PR Channelling is as effective as real channelling. "I am channelling the PR of an expired Domain. It is a , OH MY GOD, a PR 8!!! He says.. he wants you to know.. that the user always comes first."

Look, I read those articles too, cause you never know. But it is like SEO 1999 style: "Lets all get together and trick the SE". No, how about lets do the best we can do to make a great site that is search friendly, not search obsessed.

These sorts of tricks are counterproductive, and are designed with several flaws to there reasoning, highest amongst them that SE are everything. Users are everything. Users and the sales they bring.

I too can create all sorts of complex looking matrixes to disprove PR channelling, but why bother? Think of it this way: How long would it take to implement this "strategy"? Is that the best way to spend your time? What about writing an article, and having it syndicated? What about good old fashioned PR, public relations? Are your tax deductions all organised? Are all your customers happy? Do you know for sure?

PR Channelling is like naming policies for images: maybe it has a small effect (though I doubt it), but it isn't worth going back, in retrospect, and implementing. Far better uses can be found for your time, and if they can't, let me know, I am sure I could find one or two!!!
Besides that, PR Channelling will only work if your site already ranks well, and all other forms of SEO are implemented. It wont in and of itself solve anything. All my Humble opinion of course.

PR channeling is an OK concept, but it should be achieved through proper site architecture rather than artificially manipulating internal/external links.

Ok, I really wanted to make sure I wasn't missing the boat here.

The site I have currently in development, is a content site with a shopping section. As it is planned right now:

A links to B, C, D, E & F, all subpages in each category will link back to those main pages, which will be properly optimized for their content section.

B will also link to sub-B's, C to sub-C's etc.

Is this a good strategy? It makes sense to me from a user standpoint, but SEO-wise, I really don't know. I've looked/read the "build it this way" to maximize the PR (which I know counts, but isn't the most important factor) and I swear they go right over my head.

A will be the main domain, B, C & D will be sub's to the main domain and E & F are going to be important information, but not "subdomain" worthy...

Thank you for the input,

Diana

What kind of SEO people are you, if you are willing to ignore "tricks of the trade", which are also sometimes known as revolutionary techniques?

You don't have to sacrifice navigation to channel PageRank. I'm tired of explaining this concept. There are 100 threads on how to make the navigation how you want and still channel pagerank where you want.

Ignore this type of advice, and don't bother posting "Why can't I find my site in the SERPS?" three months from now.

Reckless creation of webpages with no planned site-structure does not a good SEO make.

If you could post links to some of the more explanatory threads, I'm willing to read it, digest it, etc, but I have a lousy experience with the forum search function. It really doesn't like it when I try to use PR in a search along with other things... *sigh*

Diana

<< http://forums.seochat.com/showthrea...on&pagenumber=1 >>

I'm guessing that's one of the threads Magna is referring to. I have read it and want to be sure I understand this thought process...

So you can see the site in question (not fully developed, pretty much only frontpage right now.) http://crunchymomma.com
Navigation consists of top flash navigation, lower text navigation and category/page specific navigation on the left or right (final position is not fully determined, heck the flash isn't even complete).

For my sanity I'm naming the pages and then assigning letters in parantheses.

I have pages Home (A), Shopping (B), Articles (C), Community/Forums (D), Tips (E), About Us (F)

B has main pages Categories (g), Manufactuers (h), etc
C has topic specific sub-pages (i)
D has various forum categoires (j)
E has various topic specific sub-pages (k)
F is informational and offers contact information

The original plan was that the text navigation (since flash is still seemingly invisible):

A will link to B, C, D, E & F
B will link to g, h, product pages, etc and back to A
C will link to i and back to A
D will link j and back to A
E will link to k and back to A
F will link to contact page and back to A

g,h,i,j,k and contact would also link back to A

If I understand this thread correctly, I should do:

A links to B, C, D, E & F (actually I should probably bury F?)
B would link to g, h, etc
C links to i
D to j
E to k
F to contact

g, h, i, j, k would link to All top categories? or just back to A?

Since stats indicate that most users do have a version of flash installed, I could leave those links intact and just modify the text navigation? Or are the SE's now able to spider Flash files? I don't think I've seen any evidence that they can.

Am I on the right track now? Flash is not my "normal" but I like the effects I can create with it, whilst keeping the file sizes manageable.

Diana

Hey Manga, I've asked Egol, so I'll also ask you, can you show us an example of this revolutionary technique in action?

Hey Glengara,

On a user friendly basis only, which of the two options I listed in my last post, seems like a better method to you?

Thanks,

Diana

EGOL won't post links, but I know he is doing extensive testing using many of the linking/non-linking techniques we discuss. For his niche market and field, I agree with him not sharing his work. Because of the type of website he is running, it is easily duplicatable, so I don't blame him for not wanting to show off.

The best example I can show of channelling PageRank, is the PR4 on DatingVault, with only 1 or 2 backlinks. In fact, I really don't know how many backlinks there are, because I just don't care. I have been making strides with my PR, pushing it to the top, and not even trying to find link partners to speed along the process. (As a point of inquiry - the site's age is about the same as how long I've been on SEO Chat, and it had a PR4+ within the first month).

This is just one of many websites we run, but it is quickly becoming the "hub" of all of our websites because of the incredibly intricate site planning that I put in, dissecting each section and drawing them out like trees on paper. However, we am currently running 6 other websites that were set up only to test internal PR leak. Each one of these pages focuses on a specific site structure, that I have diagrammed and follow to the letter. The goal is to see which flat structure pushes the most PR to certain pages, i.e. the home page, the order page and the battle pages.

I cannot share those links at this time, because it would unbalance the test to have all of the people from this forum suddenly clicking to go to them. (In other words, we are running a "no-exposure" test, to see how long it takes Google and Alexa to rank us with 1 PR7 backlink, no advertising, and no previous activity on the domain).

There are other websites we work on, that have no prior thought put into the site structure - and you can definately see how the PR is pushed around when you don't plan out the routes you want it to push to. A good example is http://www.psychosemantics.com .

I hope this helps. We're not eager to share proprietary secrets, but if you ask more in-depth questions perhaps I can answer them.

Diana, I quite liked your:
A links to B, C, D, E & F, all subpages in each category will link back to those main pages, which will be properly optimized for their content section.
B will also link to sub-B's, C to sub-C's etc.

But then I'm a fan of the themed pyramid structure which is similar, and you can read about in the threads below.
http://www.searchengineworld.com/en...me_pyramids.htm
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum3/3060.htm

*EGOL won't post links*
Egol won't even post his home page ;-)

*The best example I can show of channelling PageRank, is the PR4 on DatingVault, with only 1 or 2 backlinks. In fact, I really don't know how many backlinks there are, because I just don't care.*

You've lost me there, you brag on the PR4 with only 1/2 backlinks and then say you don't know or care how many you have?

You guys should either come up with examples of where your so-called REVOLUTIONARY TECHNIQUE can be seen to work, or keep it entirely to yourselves.

<added> If that psychosomantics site with 1500 results is the best you can come up with to show the success of your RT....</added>

I don't know how it could be more clear - a site goes from 0 to 4 in one update with only 10 pages and no backlinks. So, maybe you can explain to me how YOU think this is influential.

Ok, I'll keep it to myself. Thanks for the advice, since I'm sure you speak for all of the forum members.

By the way, an addendum: I didn't claim that I had invented any revolutionary techniques - I simply said that you are ignoring potential changes that could be revolutionary in their design.

They may not work at all - which is why I have six seperate tests going.

I only said that you are seem to be intent on ignoring a problem that comes up again and again, on the poor and unfounded assumption that PR leak doesn't exist.

Well, good for you. I hope you do well against the people who are willing to experiment with new techniques.