Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Well I guess it will be a while before enough awareness really spreads about PR not doing a lot... but, I would assume most of those requests are from people who don't know that link acquisition should be based on a lot more than PR (and PR being at the lower end of the links value). Possibly those same people who are still trying to trade links based on PR... the ones that send the spam emails lol.
Sorry Mark, neither of us meant to offend. It's just that as Ryan said there really aren't any shortcuts with it, so when you ask for quick ways to build PR it's easy to assume you're looking for a shortcut. So Ryan was just trying to give you some good sound advice there, since a lot of people do ask similar stuff and don't understand about there not being shortcuts. Plus PR building really shouldn't be anywhere on the agenda for an SEO anyway since it's of such little consequence to any outcomes.
Then you'd be selling links based on PR, which doesn't make much sense. I get spam emails offering links from high PR sites, but we all know that it doesn't work that way. A site may have high tool bar PR but really have very little trust and authority, with links that are next to worthless. At the same time, a site may have fairly low PR but pass great link juice.
PR isn't up to date, and it's a single metric (a quite unimportant one) among hundreds. I would look at MozRank over and above PR every time, along with the age of domain, the site's own rankings, the number of links already coming off the site, where my link would go, and so on...
People do buy links from high PR sites but only because they don't understand that it's almost meaningless nowadays. It's kind of a scam selling them on that basis.
We've been using it with a couple of sites for quite a while. Customers buy a LOT more through Paypal but then there are still purchases made, and for all we know those purchases might not have been made if GC wasn't an option. Also, I reckon its use has gone up a little in the past year.
In summary I'd say that whilst not that many customers use it, there's still some, and that's still more money 
The check list is below:
1. Don't worry about PR
That's it 
Honestly, don't think about building up page rank, think about your business objectives and goals, then create strategies based upon them... no strategy would include building up Page Rank, and Page Rank really doesn't mean a lot anyway so there's no purpose that a campaign in building up PR can serve really.
If it's not a competitive keyword, or a phrase that's unlikely to be found elsewhere then it will rank them all. They're all indexed and they're all relevant to the query. They wouldn't all rank if other sits had that same specific word string.
I've never seen or heard of it actually happening, except one example I was given where it was attempted but ended up boosting the competitors rankings. It's highly unlikely to ever be an issue in my opinion.
There's a lot of code to crawl through before you reach the indexable content. I remember reading somewhere that there is a way to externalize viewstate, that might help.
You might want some internal links with the keyword in the anchor text pointing to the page... i.e. your sitemap could, instead of just "home" be "Tampa DJ Homepage" or something.
You don't have many linking root domains, and of your incoming links, you need a few that have the keyword in their anchor text too.
Sorry yes, off-page is mainly to do with incoming links from other websites to yours. It looks to me that many of the links are natural and have not been built by yourselves... this is good, it means people are linking to your content. That's all the more reason to add social sharing buttons so you get even more links
Of the link building that has been done, it looks as though there's not too much of one lot of anchor text (there's some, but not too much), which is good. There's plenty of different types of links, from different sources, etc... some are decent quality too, and many are relevant.
Cannibalization is explained here : http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-solve-keyword-cannibalization
My point with it though, is that please make sure that any and every link on your site which has the targeted keyword only points to that same page. Don't have a link saying lifestyle magazine which points anywhere else other than the homepage... if one does exist, change the anchor text
It's not just bookmarking that needs to be added, you need to add a whole range of social buttons and you need to make them as easy as possible to see... you want your articles tweeted, etc... right?
lol thumbs up for that... have a look at Alan's stuff through-out here and you can tell he's hardcore SEO to the bone 
That's a kind of "How long is a piece of string?" question I'm afraid. One that nobody can ever really answer. For one, you can't really say it will ever appear for any particular keyword. You can make an educated guess based on the competition, the factors around the site itself and the content, along with a whole bunch of other stuff... but even then it's difficult to put time scales on things like that.
Also, what SEO is being done, who is doing it and how much do they know about what to do.
Even if you get page one, that could mean position 9 or something, so you still wouldn't get that much traffic. Once you're there, how long will you stay there??
There's a lot of info needed to get anywhere near even making an educated guess.
Edit I just had a look at your site, you seem to be aiming at Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester and more, but your headline on the homepage is:
And your title tag is similar. This is not good!!
If I were looking for airport parking at Heathrow and saw your title tag in the serps, I wouldn't click as at first glance it looks to be Manchester only. If I did click, I'd instantly see that headline jump out at me and I'd click the back button.
Just thought I'd better let you know.
You still have some nasty crawl issues. The main story on the homepage, on the banner is something to do with gastric bands/weight loss, etc... but clicking on it gives you a 404 error and the resulting URL is a dupe or redirect of the homepage for this. That's not good.
Aside from that stuff, maybe tone down on the ads a little, ensure no cannibalization with internal linking, and do some different off-page to what you have been currently... your off-page is looking pretty good with fair diversity in anchor text and link types, etc... but probably worth you ensuring some bookmarking and social shares, tweets, etc... are done. Do some of that yourself but also, add some social sharing options for the articles, and try to add them with a call to action feel. You've got the perfect content for that kind of thing, you should be taking more advantage of it.
Being ad heavy is not going to help you anyway, Google doesn't like ad heavy and if it's too obvious that the article is there to get clicks on ads then your rankings will suffer (and it is ad heavy).
Did you write the article yourself, or have it written? I mean so it's a unique and original article? If it's just a slightly altered copy of another already existing article then that won't help a lot.
Hi Gary,
See Dejan's answer here, I think it will help http://www.seomoz.org/q/any-recent-discoveries-or-observations-on-the-official-line-of-incoming-link-penalization
Haha excellent... if we had forum sigs in here, mine would be:
"If I don't reply to your email don't call me on the phone... I will not be nice to you and you will hear my employees laughing in the background." - EGOL, 2011
Something that meets all of the following criteria:
With that lot covered it wouldn't get deleted instantly
Major faux pas, never part of the game.
It's definitely a serious violation and at some point there will be a penalty for it. It will arrive in a spam workers list of sites to go through some when, and they'll see it and slap it. There's just not enough spam workers for that to be fast, and maybe it hasn't been reported enough or even at all to get into their lists yet.
It's too much of an old trick to ever work, and keyword density, etc... doesn't do squat now anyway so there's no point.
You'd do well to study this a bit http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#metrics-1
It has many answers to your Q.
I'm pretty sure that links don't have to actually refer any traffic to pass value. You'll probably find that the majority of links that aren't on new/fresh content sites such as news sites, etc... don't refer much anyway. We know for example that the age of a link counts, and an older link can be worth more. When you think of some of those static sites out there that never change but still have good authority (especially for their niche) but don't get tonnes of traffic due to their industry, demographic, speciality, etc... They can pass some great link value even though some of those links will simply never get clicked.
If Google were to assign higher value to links that got clicked more, we'd only ever see sites at the top of the serps that had links from news sites, other sites that might well be most relevant would be held down.
Take a website or page about something obscure, an interest that somebody might have in an uncommon area of archaeology or something. Now let's say the site has great authority in its obscure niche, but of course gets very little traffic due to its obscurity. That site linking to another similar site would be excellent in terms of link value for the similar site.
Usage data might come into it beyond us clicking from the serps, and going into it with us clicking through as referrals too, but I wouldn't think it would have that much effect.
Well we know that the anchor text of the internal link is the keyword, then there could also be anchor text of that same keyword from some of the backlinks, plus the URL containing the city name. I'd say it was pretty much as simple as that