Chief Alchemist - Business Consulting For The 21st Century Via A Holistic & Intelligent Approach
Share ChiefAlchemist.com. RSS 2.0 feed for ChiefAlchemist.com. Sign up for the mailing list. Follow Chief Alchemist on Twitter. 'Like' the Chief Alchemist's page on Facebook. See what Chief Alchemist has been Q&A'ing on Quora. Chief Alchemist bookmarks & highlights on Diigo.com. Follow the Chief Alchemist on Digg.com. Chief Alchemist channel on Last.fm. Chief Alchemist on Flickr. Mark 'Chief Alchemist' Simchock on LinkedIn. Free Initial Consultation. Email Chief Alchemist. Phone Chief Alchemist.
  • Mark ‘Chief Alchemist’ Simchock
  • 'Email me.Email => ca .at. ChiefAlchemist .dot. com
  • 'Phone me.Alchemy United => 732 997-0028
  •  
  • Free initial consultation.Free => Initial Consultation
  • Please be sure to subscribe to your communication channels of choice.
  • Click To Close => The small green (consultation), red (email) or blue (phone) icons in the top upper right.
CURRENT “TOP 10” TOPICS TOOLS CLIENTS & PROJECTS SOURCES SEARCH HIDE
Business Consulting For The 21st Century Via A Holistic & Intelligent Approach

Is page rank an obsolete metric?

Consumed => “Looking Beyond Google PageRank: Alternative SEO Metrics” by Modi Mann on Six Revisions.

http://sixrevisions.com/content-strategy/alternative-seo-metrics

=> Value add (i.e., left a comment)…

Good issue to raise, thanks Modi.

Objective and accurate or not, many of these matter because they matter to Google & company. Like it or not, we have to be mindful of them. That said, it’s just as important (if not more so) to (try to) measure the quality of visitors. More isn’t necessarily better. Better is better. That should be the Holy Grail, not Google’s PR.

For (an extreme) example, an e-comm site can get thousands of visits and zero sales. Or one hundred visits and one hundred sales. Which is better?

These various metrics attempt to measure the quality of a site, but as mentioned, they are more often than not somewhat over-rated. On the other hand, they do not measure the quality of the visitor relative to the site itself, or even within a competitive niche, subset of some universe, etc.  There’s no context. Context of any stat is always important. Without context a statistic is meaningless.

Finally, if we’re going to use tweet counts as something meaningful then we’re all in trouble. My gawd, that doesn’t even mean the person read the article. But more importantly, it also does not mean they liked it. The tweet could say, “This article sucks.” That number means one thing and one thing only…someone tweeted it. Why? We can’t say, so how can we use it in some meaningful way?

I do like to be as SEO savvy as I can. But these quirks and accepted myths do seem to give the discipline a less than ideal reputation, eh?

Required.
Will not be published. Required.
Please include http://