RealRank™ Doesn’t Solve Anything For Bloggers
November 20th, 2007 by Court
Everyone in the land has been talking about IZEA RealRank™ lately, hoping that it’s a replacement for PageRank. For those that aren’t familiar with it, IZEA is the parent company of PayPerPost and RealRank™ is a new system that they have come up with to rank blogs. They say it will make it so they don’t have to use PageRank to rank sites. PayPerPost almost has RealRank™ ready, in fact the PPP blog says they’re going to turn it on tonight.
I’ve seen some posts lately that proclaim RealRank™ to be the white knight for bloggers. I’ll give them this, it will be the best ranking system out there because it will track real stats. Bloggers have some decisions to make, and I can see some real problems with this.
The Issue Isn’t PageRank, It’s Paid Links
Taking one ranking system away to implement another when the issue is paid links is only going to delay the inevitable. The issue isn’t the ranking system here. Does anyone think that from one day to the next Google is going to be happy just because PayPerPost (or Text-Link-Ads for that matter) changes how they rate the sites that participate in their program?
Google Isn’t Going To Like It
The core problem here is that Google thinks that paid links cause inaccuracies in their ranking system (which they do). Don’t get me wrong, Google should be trying to figure out better ways to find and discount the value of paid links. I have believed this since the beginning and my stance hasn’t changed on this issue. Google has wronged a lot of people during this process but the facts are facts. Google will continue to fight against paid links.
If you have a site whose PageRank was slapped -1, -2, or eliminated altogether, you’re already on the radar. What’s going to happen if you continue to sell links under the guise of a new ranking system? I would hate to see this happen, but believe that it’s possible that Google will remove you from their index altogether. Google has an index of over 10 billion web pages and I dare say that they would remove a few hundred thousand pages to protect their lifeblood, which is their search relevancy.
Google is already on the war path, and I can tell you that so far they aren’t getting the results they’re looking for. People are still selling text links and writing paid reviews that pass link juice. It seems likely that Google will continue to slash and hash until they get the result they want, which is for people to place nofollows on all paid links. I’m not that happy about the fact that I had to do it, but my plans for this site will be accelerated with the help of Google, so I changed my advertising models.
What RealRank™ Is Going To Do
Image Credit: AdamZyglis.com
It’s going to make it 100 times easier for Google to identify you as a sponsored reviewer. You will have to install a piece of javascript in your footer, and Google will easily be able to identify and track that code. If you install the code, you’re running the risk of Google slapping your PageRank or doing something worse if they feel the need.
Many people don’t think that Google will take it this far. Why wouldn’t they? I keep reading that Google needs us more than we need them and this isn’t true. Google has billions of pages to rank and the number of blogs that use PayPerPost and other similar services is very small. It’s likely that Google sees these as weaker sites - banning them isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
I’ll tell you right here, right now how Google is going to see this. Keep in mind that this isn’t how I see it, it’s how Google will see it:
- They have been issuing warnings for the last few years. (no effect)
- They increased the validity of the warnings with the first slaps. (very little effect)
- They slapped harder to increase the validity of the warnings. (very little effect)
- They eliminated the PageRank on many sites that sell sponsored posts and reviews. (very little effect except for the fact the IZEA came out with RealRank™, which doesn’t solve anything for Google)
Google isn’t getting what they want - do you think they’re going to give up?
Can You Survive Without Google?
If you can, by all means continue to write paid reviews. If you can’t, you have a decision to make. I think you’re taking a huge risk by writing them. I wouldn’t put anything past Google and believe that they may start de-indexing people that sell links. This would start with the small sites because they don’t have as much relevant content.
The best option here is for you to start selling your own paid reviews with nofollows on them. If PayPerPost would change their policies to allow posties to stop selling PageRank, it would be a lot safer service for everyone. As is, they’re asking everyone to try to hide from Google. What are they going to do when people start getting banned? The responsible thing to do is to create a model that’s safe for the posties. Right now it looks like that’s not going to happen.
Who is RealRank™ going to help? The .01% of bloggers that don’t care about Google traffic.
Save to del.icio.us
Digg This!
Post to Facebook
StumbleItRelated Posts:
Case Study - SEO Meter
Ok guys it’s time to take a look at an online business to evaluate what they’re doing right, and...
My Responsibiliy To My Readers
Mark did a great job yesterday of presenting a few of the different blogging business models. The fa...
The #1 Word Of Successful Bloggers And Copywriters
To learn about the #1 word of successful bloggers and copywriters, please read the following paragra...
2 Reasons Google PageRank Still Matters
Some of the most heated debates I've seen in the comments of Court's Internet Marketing School have ...
Why Social Media Matters, and Why Kia Doesn’t Care
This post was submitted to YouBlog by Kathy Milette, who runs a marketing blog called The Wet Foot J...
BlogRush Was In, Now It’s Out
Truth be told, I think I could get a somewhat decent amount of traffic with BlogRush if I was willin...
November 20th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
I think you’re spot on.
RealRank doesn’t give Google waht they want, so they’re just going to keep on coming, and the logical end game is to start de-indexing sites…
Ouch!
I’ve just been speaking to my coder to get him to put nofollows on the links in the plugins I use for ads.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Ok…
Maybe I missed something, but “RealRank” doesn´t take into account “PageRank” so its not “selling” PageRank.
RealRank is suppose to “sell” visitors and pageviews, that is what they use as ranking factores, not PageRank.
I think you completely missed the point.
November 20th, 2007 at 10:04 pm
If you sell a link it’s going to pass PageRank, unless you put a nofollow on it. I think you forgot to read the post.
November 23rd, 2007 at 7:38 pm
I don’t think they forgot to read anything.
Google has dropped bloggers page ranks, many are at zero. So how are they passing rank through there links, if there pr is zero or not indexed?
November 24th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Hi Holly,
Google hasn’t actually dropped anyone’s PageRank. They have dropped the perceived PageRank that appears in the Google toolbar.
If they had dropped true PageRank it would be drastically influencing search engine rankings - it isn’t.
None of these changes have affected anyone’s rankings. No one has been de-indexed yet but that will happen if people keep pushing the issue.
November 20th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
RealRank™ Doesn’t Solve Anything For Bloggers
Court laid the smack down on PayPerPost! I haven’t seen him attack a company directly before and his reasons for not liking Realrank seem to make a lot of sense. The post talks about how the real issue here is paid links, and not the ranking system it…
November 20th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
Court, you’re absolutely right. The code is only going to make it easier for Google to detect the people they want to ban…and I do believe it will probably come to that. They haven’t shown any inclination to back down and they really don’t have a reason to. Even the biggest of the big boys of blogging (say that five times fast) aren’t big enough to scare Google. We’re either going to have to live with the rules they give us or figure out how to live without them.
November 20th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Court, I agree with your comments here. But the real issue is whether Google Page rank is really worth anything in the grand scheme of things. Its valuable for the people who do sell links only because the purchasers of those links perceive some value. Personally I stopped worry about how to please Google a long time ago. I can get traffic without them and if they decide to send me some then thanks to Google, but its not something I worry about much. I write for my readers not for Google or any other bot which may pass my site.
November 20th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
Thanks for your comments Bruce. I don’t believe that PageRank is the issue - page ranking is the issue.
I don’t know of a single elite level blogger that didn’t benefit enormously from Google during their rise.
If you think that you can do it without Google traffic, more power to you. I just want to let you and people like you know that you could be choosing to get yourself banned.
Again, the ultimate issue is traffic from Google, not PageRank. PageRank isn’t worth anything, but rankings are worth everything.
November 20th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Right on the nail
November 20th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
realrank is a joke. wopptiedoo, somebody can track how many visitors a site can get and rank them accordingly. this would have been valuable/news in like 1996.
November 20th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
I totally agree with you.
I used to work for PPP.
I didn’t like what was happening with page rank and other things within the company, and quit working for them about 3 months ago now.
I removed all their tracking codes, buttons, and deleted about 180 posts I had done for them.
Wiped them clean off my blog.
I still took a hit from google for my past postings, I know I was wrong doing what I did, too little, too late.
But yes, I totally agree that while realrank my help posties keep making money, eventually google is going to de-index them all.
I have more to say, but won’t take up your comment space.
PPP has screwed a lot of bloggers over, me being one of them.
November 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Kat did you contact G and let them know what you did? Remember they tell the algorithm to take this and that into consideration and it might just be they took an old foot print from your site.
November 20th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Vic,
Yes I did, I have no idea if google is looking into it or not.
What’s done is done though ya know?
I did wrong, I can take it. Hopefully next page rank update, I’ll get my PR 5 back. But I honestly believe my blog has been tainted forever because PPP refuses to delete my account and all the links to my blog they have on their site.
So frustrated with that, you don’t even know!
November 20th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Let me ask you a question. Do you want a PageRank 5 blog that makes $100 a month, or a PageRank 0 blog that makes $2000?
Unless you get some kind of a medal at the end of the year from Google for having a high PR and don´t think it will get you anywhere
November 21st, 2007 at 10:12 am
custodio do you have any understanding what so ever that PR is directly related to your websites traffic?
November 20th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
If one is blogging for money I can’t imagine not being concerned if their blog is indexed at Google or not. Which is why this RealRank thing confuses me. If a bunch of posties have been slapped with 0 page rank, the next step is to no longer index them.
Would advertisers want links/review posts on blogs that won’t show up in Google? The RealRank thing just seems like shooting yourself in the foot.
November 20th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
You asked, “Would advertisers want links/review posts on blogs that won’t show up in Google?”
No, they won’t. Yeah, it is shooting yourself in the foot.
November 20th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
I’m not so sure. I think there’s a market for reviews simply for traffic. Those who buy a review from John Chow probably don’t do it for the Google juice, do they?
If you can get enough traffic without Google, why not?
November 20th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
I think there is too! That’s why I said this:
There is a market for it, but there is no marketplace.
November 20th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
If I’ve understood correctly, ReviewMe does not have the same restriction of no nofollow. So that’s an option.
If that’s not enough, I guess someone will have to create one…
November 20th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
The only part of the post I cannot agree is this:
Actually, I believe very few bloggers care about Google traffic. It’s probably true that most who have heard about RealRank or PageRank do, but the rest don’t. Many bloggers blog for the sake of blogging, not search engine traffic.
November 20th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Hi Sutocu,
Thanks for your comments. I have always respected your opinions and will continue to do so.
I don’t believe that many bloggers would choose to stay with their low-traffic blogs if they could trade right now for high-traffic ones. Many blogs don’t get much Google traffic, but that doesn’t mean they don’t want it.
If you don’t care about people seeing what you write, why put it online? If a person doesn’t care about getting traffic, I don’t know why they would be reading my site.
November 21st, 2007 at 2:10 pm
“If you don’t care about people seeing what you write, why put it online?”
That’s actually something I’ve been telling a few friends who insist on not having their blog listed in search engines. Actually some of them are password protected and only available to select friends…
November 24th, 2007 at 11:40 am
I’m fine with that Sutocu. My site is about internet marketing though. I’m not going to write for casual bloggers that don’t care about getting traffic. This discussion has absolutely nothing to do with them.
November 20th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
The other day someone said they didn’t want to link to me because of my association with PPP and today I saw someone compare Google to al Qaeda. That’s it. I don’t give a monkey’s butt about PR really (I’m too new to see any effect one way or the other) but the craziness did me in. I’m officially reformed.
I’d be interested in seeing what RealRank does, but I’m more interested in my reputation at this point.*sigh* Live and learn, I guess.
November 20th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
[…] Tuttle has written a great article on the new IZEA Real Rank. I think he is right about this. I would be careful about installing the Real Rank javascript. Read […]
November 20th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
I’ve never used ppp, but I read TechCrunch and know enough about them. Plus I keep up with this industry. I don’t think their ranking system is meant to make google happy. They use pagerank to pass out opportunities and now that everyone had theirs yanked, they have to find a solution. Enter realrank.
I don’t think realrank is valuable to anyone except ppp. They say they’ll release to non members, but what’s the point.
Google should really consider meeting half way. Think of a tag that labels ads but also has some sort of benefit.
Think of it like legalizing drugs. Sure, the law can continue to put people in jail, but others will continue to pop up and take over. If you legalize it and have some control, then both sides will get what they want.
November 20th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
You’re right, it isn’t meant to keep Google happy. PPP either doesn’t foresee or doesn’t care that this could hurt bloggers.
I agree that Google should act differently but it’s never going to happen. In this case, I think we have to look at it as it is, not as it should be.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
I don’t think realrank is valuable to anyone except ppp.
That is the whole point! If they do not stop asking Bloggers for dofollow links they well keep getting Bloggers sent to oblivion on search rankings.
This is not a problem of ranking a Blog. All you have to do is put a code and get all the stats this is all about DOFOLLOW!!!!!!!!
“Google should really consider meeting half way.”
What half way???? Do you understand that Google’s PR and algorithm is largely based on LINKS!!!!
There is no half way in order for there algorithm to work properly only real dofollow links need to be counted.
November 20th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
So, if I’m reading this correctly, we have very little say about how we present our content online?
When governments crack down on their people’s internet activities, millions cry foul. When Google tells us to change the way we do something, we bend over and take it?
About 60% of my traffic comes from Google, but the average Googler only stays on the site for under two minutes. Most of my real readers have come from other sources.
John Chow was completely removed from Google a little while ago, but he continues to gain transient readers. It seems that he doesn’t really *need* G to survive and make several thousand dollars a month. Would he make more if he was still indexed? For sure. But it’s not an absolute necessity. There are still lots of other search engines out there that are used by millions.
If Google does remove several million pages due to paid links, then eventually their search engine results will become stale. Many people are getting their product information from blogs. Removing the majority of quality blogs will let outdated commercial, splog and (worst of all) C|Net pages to rise to the top.
Big-G will be around for many years to come, but if we start caving in to their demands, then we should also stop complaining about governments that censor or control the digital content of their people. I don’t see either as being very different
November 20th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
The truth Jason is that you can present your content however you want. You can do whatever you want with your site, and Google can do whatever they want with theirs.
If they choose to remove you from their search results, they’re within their rights to do so.
Jason, think about what you’re saying. Do you think that you can make Google change what they want to do? If you think you can survive without them by all means disregard this post. If you believe that you can do what John Chow did, do it!
I left room in what I wrote for this. I seriously doubt that you or anyone else really believes they can do it though. If you believe it, I can tell you how to remove yourself from Google’s index. After that you can do whatever you want.
I’m one of the few that’s facing the truth Jason. I see this how it is. I also see that it should be different. Does that mean it is different?
November 20th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Jason Google has made no demands it has always being known that you can not sell links and pass down PR. The difference now is for suck a long time it was not a big deal but now it has become a huge deal.
Believe this or not Jason Google is looking after your site and after your PR. They are looking after your well being.
Do you understand that if a spammer buys a domain and buys 4 PR7 links and buys 50 PR2 he will effectively be a PR7-8 and he can then scrape your whole site and the bot will look at his PR and look at yours and you will get the worst of the Duplicate content filter even though it was your original work. Do you understand this?
All Google is doing is enforcing what has always being known.
But yet people are bitching a whining. I ask you did PPP or Text Link Ads consult with Google before launching the business model. Do you understand that this companies business model is completely based on Googles PR think about that there whole reason for business is for the PR. All they have to do is remove the dofollow from there guidelines. But the fact is they really are not selling a link or a review they are selling the Google PR for that specific site.
November 20th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
Hey Court,
I think I agree with everything you’ve said here. I can’t imagine that Google will be impressed with this new system, and that seems to be the issue here.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Steven Google will not care period! This idiot RealRank bull has nothing to do with them.
Google will just keep killing peoples PR if they keep selling links period!
November 20th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
RealRank was never meant for Google. It was meant to replace PR which isn’t very useful, but is for some reason still considered important.
RealRank is being released early because of Google, but has been in development for a while now. It was already being tested before the recent PR smackdown.
The paid posts from services like PPP are the least of Google’s problems. Even deindexing all blogs that write for PPP wouldn’t help with MFA sites that steal postie content. So MFAs will continue to steal from bloggers, including posties, and Google will still index those posts. Why? because MFAs are making them money. Posties are making someone else money.
Oh and nofollow? Wasn’t that meant for comments? Now it’s supposed to be used for everything. I’ll start using nofollow the way they want when they start paying me to do their job.
It’s not that hard to spot a PPP post, even the ones with no in post disclosure. They could devalue those posts or prevent link juice from going out of them. Why don’t they?
With fewer ways to advertise on the web, adsense and adwords will make more money. Which will increase the number of MFAs. Which will line Google’s pockets. They’ll never do anything about MFAs.
Why should they? They can use this as an excuse to put a competitor out of business and say that they’re protecting the search results. They’re not, they’re protecting adsense and adwords. It another case of Google using FUD and misdirection.
I can’t believe you fell for it.
November 20th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
You can’t believe I fell for what? You’re stating how it should be and I’m stating how it is. I don’t care why Google is doing it - I care that they’re doing it.
Do you think that you, me, or anyone else is going to change what Google does? I show people how to get results, how to take advantage of current circumstances. I’m not preaching about why Google this and why Google that, I’ll leave that to you.
Who said that RealRank is for Google? I certainly didn’t. Why don’t you calm down and actually read what I wrote. You can get as mad as you want but it doesn’t change the fact that Google can and probably will lay the smack down on sites that go with this.
November 20th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
You’re right, I did get carried away. Google has had that effect on me lately. *L*
November 20th, 2007 at 8:45 pm
Well no one can blame you for that.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
You are actually comparing apples and oranges. Google does not pass PR down Adsense. Text Links are totally based on that. Notice how Adbrite users have not being touched. Or Kontera users if this was according to you because of adsense would it not make sense to just start smacking every Kontera or Adbrite user? They are not because it has nothing to do with what you think it does this has to do with starting a market with another persons apples this is what this is about.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
LOL sorry I missed this part.
“Oh and nofollow? Wasn’t that meant for comments? Now it’s supposed to be used for everything. I’ll start using nofollow the way they want when they start paying me to do their job.”
I see you just do not know what this is about.
Google does not want you to nofollow every link, if everybody did this there algorithm would not work how can you value inlinking if knowbody is linking to anybody.
What they do not want is for you to sell a dofollow link.
In other words they want to know that when you link to some one with the dofollow that you are linking to quality content. and not just some guy peddling Viagra pills with a paid link.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
On the SPOT!
Google makes 99% of their money from advertising, their protecting their business. Today its “nofollow” tomorrow its something else
November 20th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
custodio there competition is neither Text Links or PPP your assumption is laughable.
There largest competition for advertising is Yahoo. Example the Yahoo Viacom advertising deal.
http://www.techcrunch.com
“Today Viacom snubs Google again, choosing to work with Yahoo on search advertising. There are few details of the deal, but it doesn’t appear that Yahoo is making any revenue guarantees, which are becoming standard in large search advertising deals. Google gave Fox certain guarantees in a $900 million deal announced last year, and Microsoft almost certainly guaranteed revenue to Facebook in order to get access to their search traffic.”
Yes as you see with the Google Fox deal we are talking about a billion dollars.
We Bloggers really believe with our little adsense and ppp are the center of the world.
No custodio Adsense is not the best money maker for Google I invite you to take the 2 or 3 hours to look at there financial statements so you can make better informed comments.
November 20th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
There is no need to search for PPP blogs. They are nicely listed out in a directory at PPP. Sitting ducks all ready for Google.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
The obvious thing to do is to work with the system. I think some people just don’t care and think they can pick a fight with Google. Its like walking up to a tank and saying “Im not moving”. Ok well the tank will either run you over or go around you.
Some people are stupid. Following What John CHow has to say about bending over and taking it. Who cares. Hes already established. Im sure he gets traffic from search engines. What if they deleted all his indexing. Im sure he would care. This is all Court is saying. Its about indexing in google and getting traffic from it, not PR. Who cares about PR but directory owners and they got slammed.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
I would put money on the table John Chow got de-indexed he would be whining like a little girl.
If he really meant all the crap he talks why not go to Google webmasters tools and request to get de-indexed.
But yet people lat only read his crap they actually repeated.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
[…] Real Rank will it matter? […]
November 20th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Hi Court
Great to see someone posting the facts about the google page rank drop.I am sick of all the whining post that have been tossed around the web these past few weeks.
You are right when you say a person needs google not the other way around.
I see the real rank to be quite useless myself.From what I have seen on it it has little to offer.
Steven