Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Ok...let me rephrase...

In general what  reasons do you usually see for such a wide discrepancy from Da to PR?

Thanks for your help.

So since the Da is so different that the Toolbar PR you are assuming it is some type of spam penalty? Perhaps because almost all of the inbound links are from the same domain owner?

All of the PrWeb press releases are now "no-follow" links after a dust up with Google last year after getting spammed. They used to be great links....not so much now.

Sometimes, the release is picked up by other sites which may use follow links....but you never know and the may be low value sites.

Looking at a website that has a Google Toolbar rank of 2. Moz Authority is 65. Why would there be such a huge difference? Site has been around since 2000 but has not been updated. Mosst of the links are from 3000 links all owned by the same person.

Paul,

I appreciate your input and agree with your sentiment. However, as we know, Google is on the warpath regarding links. We are dealing with an algorithm that is applied very broadly. My fear is that  perfectly innocent and resonable links between companies gets caught in a new tweak by Google.

I have seen many "good" quality sites get hurt  by Panda and Penguin. Sometimes the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. I've seen it enough times. Google is not perfect. If I can try and protect a site from potential harm then I would do it. The cost of multiple hosting accounts pales in comparison the getting penalized by the big G.

I have several different sites which link to each other (for valid reasons...sister companies etc). Would it be better if these were hosted from different web hosting firms? And if they are hosted by the same hosting company would it be better if they had different accounts and different IP addresses?

Not sure I understand C blocks etc. Any tutorial on here about that?

I wouls assume it would look better to Google if the links were not from the same IP address.

Thanks.

I guess I am trying to keep the authority and "age" of the page while just updating the dates. I assume this would be better. Maybe do a 301 redirect from the URL with the year in it and start fresh with a URL with no date in it.

These are all individual pages.....not a single Events page. So you would would have

Event A Jan 30, 2013

Event A Jan 29, 2014.

Same event...different year.

We have a tourism related site. We list annual events. Right now the URL extension includes the year. I assume it is better to keep the same page and update the dates, thereby keeping any links, ranking  trust and authority we built. Is that the best strategy by updating the event info with the new dates?

I would assume with a new page for the new year we would be starting over again and would have too much similar content and link diffusion.

And in the future are we better off not including the year in the URL extension?

Contrary to popular belief, I find that _some _directories are still worthwhile. Not the cookie cutter scraped sites, but relevant industry directories that have editorial control and are highly ranked can be excellent sources of links. It may cost you some money,, but they can be worth it. You just need to do your research and use the tools here.

All of the PrWeb press releases are now "no-follow" links after a dust up with Google last year after getting spammed. They used to be great links....not so much now.

Sometimes, the release is picked up by other sites which may use follow links....but you never know and the may be low value sites.