Shared publicly  - 
Robert Ramirez's profile photoMark Traphagen's profile photoEric Enge's profile photoAndrea Pernici's profile photo
I think we need to stop thinking for a bit of social purely as a "raw link" benefit and assess all the signals together. I'm going to add some of my thoughts to the bits from the article My take to your statement is in the comment for point 2.:

> Google+ posts have SEO benefits unlike other social platforms
You're feeding data directly into Google, so it's more likely Google can assess all signals it needs to rank your content. Remember other social platforms are closed or semi-closed and Google needs to make a substantial effort to crawl them, so I wouldn't say there's an SEO benefit, but an "easy access benefit" for Google and ultimately your content.

> 1. Posts are crawled and indexed almost immediately
Like I mentioned. Easy access for Google, you're feeding content directly to Google.

> 2. Google+ posts pass link equity
Maybe to the naked eye they do. Nevertheless Google still can cut this in the backend if they chose to, moreover I wouldn't be surprised if they can adjust it individually to each user depending on algorithmic analysis of behavior and what kind of stuff you share + engagement

> 3. Google+ is optimized for semantic relevance
Of course it is, it contributes to how easy Google understands not only your content, but the context too.

> What about Author Rank and Publisher Rank?
What would you do if it was your social layer? Would you trust everyone equally? See answer in 2.

> Roadmap to rankings: taking advantage of Google+ for SEO
Makes sense, but again, I would see it purely from an SEO/Link perspective, there's a lot of stuff that can be put into play here. If content is popular in G+ because (real) people engage with it and +1 it then that should be reflected in Google's index. We should also consider the freshness factor into play, for instance, sharing something that gets popular today and may die out tomorrow it's a trend/behavior Google wants to mimic in the search index.

> 9. Make your posts public
Obviously something private won't be "seen" by Google and hence it will likely not be factored into your social graph in a direct way.

Note: I'm not a Googler anymore, and these are my personal thoughts :)
Sebastian, I've seen the post there. What are you specifically referring to and how does it answer myquestion?
Sorry, read to fast and my mobile Browser didn't make it to the anchor so i haven't seen the comment you made there...

... Now i saw it but i don't get what the problem is. As search engines don't execute JavaScript these links are valid HTML-Links. They are followed, but we don't know about the degree of lowering the impact of those links going out from google properties.

But i am with you about the point that this impact might be tied to a certain social score applied to each user profile.
Too easy to fabricate. I could pay 1 million people from [insert third world country here] to give me +1s til the cows come home and influence serps. Theres a correlation between well ranked content and how often it is +1d, but it is not the cause of the good rankings, just a happy coincidence.
Thanks +Paul Gailey Alburquerque saw this information that +Gianluca Fiorelli added as a comment on Cyrus's Moz post. Good stuff. 

+Robert Ramirez read the +Cyrus Shepard post before you comment. His article is NOT about +1s causing ranking boosts. In fact, he proves why gamin +1's will not get you anywhere. Instead, he sets out to show what he and I both think actually may cause a G+ ranking boost effect, something that can be an indirect result of some plusses on pages.
+Donnie Strompf Thanks for the mention.  We are still working on it, and publishing is 2 to 3 weeks out, but we are getting closer!
Add a comment...