Are site wide links bad for web developers?
-
Like many web dev companies, we put an anchor text credit (varying the anchor text) in the footer of clients' sites. As it's a footer link, it's site wide.
This strategy's been troubling me for a while and I've been anticipating a drop in our rankings ... especially in light of Penguin. But it hasn't happened.
Any other developers our there taken a hit by having site wide links? anyone have any views on this? Anyone want to comment on the spurious and unlikely scenario that Google may recognise that web dev companies have always used site wide credits and may therefore be overlooking / not penalising them?
-
We've gotten new business from our signature links. Just use a nofollow tag and you'll be within guidelines. The link is there to get new customers. Not increase search rankings. It doesn't make sense to remove the link. Doing so would be a bad user experience.
-
Yes, straight links, "in theory" should be ok.
But speaking from the perspective of the website owner, you will never find one of my sites with sitewide links to web devs.... and especially not to SEOs or hosting providers.
I think that it will do nothing at all that is positive for my site.
-
Straight links should in theory be good though? (Like the following as a example: "Hosted by "Wehostthissite ?
-
Artists have always signed their work. It is a good thing to do for many reasons and it benefits people beyond the artist.
Web devs continued the tradition of signing their work when they built the first websites for others.
However, when they realized that a link might help their rankings they stopped signing and began linking. Some might have linked their signatures prior to that, just to make it easy for people to visit their websites.
When they realized that keyword anchor text might also be beneficial for search engine rankings they stopped linking their signatures and began linking their keywords.
In an honest assessment, any thoughtful person should conclude that keyword links are done for manipulation. Linked signatures might not be manipulative, but some probably are.
I am not a web dev but if I was I wouldn't be linking my keywords.
-
I have no good answer here, but i would like one.
However: I can say that i haven't noticed any negative effect myself on one site where we have quite a bit of site-wide links on other sites due to the site owners giving us a small link in the header/footer. Seeing that this definately is "legit" links i would hope that there should be no negative changes due to this.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Does anyone know the linking of hashtags on Wix sites does it negatively or postively impact SEO. It is coming up as an error in site crawls 'Pages with 404 errors' Anyone got any experience please?
Does anyone know the linking of hashtags on Wix sites does it negatively or positively impact SEO. It is coming up as an error in site crawls 'Pages with 404 errors' Anyone got any experience please? For example at the bottom of this blog post https://www.poppyandperle.com/post/face-painting-a-global-language the hashtags are linked, but they don't go to a page, they go to search results of all other blogs using that hashtag. Seems a bit of a strange approach to me.
Technical SEO | | Mediaholix0 -
How can I stop a tracking link from being indexed while still passing link equity?
I have a marketing campaign landing page and it uses a tracking URL to track clicks. The tracking links look something like this: http://this-is-the-origin-url.com/clkn/http/destination-url.com/ The problem is that Google is indexing these links as pages in the SERPs. Of course when they get indexed and then clicked, they show a 400 error because the /clkn/ link doesn't represent an actual page with content on it. The tracking link is set up to instantly 301 redirect to http://destination-url.com. Right now my dev team has blocked these links from crawlers by adding Disallow: /clkn/ in the robots.txt file, however, this blocks the flow of link equity to the destination page. How can I stop these links from being indexed without blocking the flow of link equity to the destination URL?
Technical SEO | | UnbounceVan0 -
Moving site from html to Wordpress site: Should I port all old pages and redirect?
Any help would be appreciated. I am porting an old legacy .html site, which has about 500,000 visitors/month and over 10,000 pages to a new custom Wordpress site with a responsive design (long overdue, of course) that has been written and only needs a few finishing touches, and which includes many database features to generate new pages that did not previously exist. My questions are: Should I bother to port over older pages that are "thin" and have no incoming links, such that reworking them would take time away from the need to port quickly? I will be restructuring the legacy URLs to be lean and clean, so 301 redirects will be necessary. I know that there will be link juice loss, but how long does it usually take for the redirects to "take hold?" I will be moving to https at the same time to avoid yet another porting issue. Many thanks for any advice and opinions as I embark on this massive data entry project.
Technical SEO | | gheh20130 -
Spammers created bad links to old hacked domain, now redirected to our new domain. Advice?
My client had an old site hacked (let's call it "myolddomain.com") and the hackers created many links in other hacked sites with links such as http://myolddomain.com/styless.asp?jordan-12-taxi-kids-cheap-T8927.html The old myolddomain.com site was redirected to a different new site since then, but we still see over a thousand spam links showing up in the new site's Search Console 404 crawl errors report. Also, using the links: operator in google search, we see many results of spam links. Should we be worried about these bad links pointing to our old site and redirecting to 404s on the new site? What is the best recommendation to clean them up? Ignore? 410s? Other? I'm seeing conflicting advice out there. The old site is hosted by the client's previous web developer who doesn't want to clean anything up on their end without an ongoing hosting contract. So beyond turning redirects on or off, the client doesn't want to pay for any additional hosting. So we don't have much control over anything related to "myolddomain.com". 😞 Thanks in advance for any assistance!
Technical SEO | | usDragons0 -
How is this site ranking so well? Their link profile is awful and website is messy and difficult to use?
Hi folks, This question has been baffling me for some time now and I'm still struggling to get to the bottom of it. www.sterlingbuild.co.uk is the website of choice for Google when it comes to searches relating to roof windows, velux windows, fakro windows etc. I can't understand why? Their link profile is atrocious. I'm struggling to find one 'high quality' link in their profile at all. Most of their links are guest blog posts which Google is apparently now treating as spam, or links from other sites that they own - also spam. The design of the site is incredibly messy and confusing. But one of the biggest flaws of the site (which I am suspicious may also be what is helping them) is they list every single different size of window as a different product. So whereas with most websites in this market, you search for the type of window you want e.g. a VELUX GGL 3050 window, and then choose the size you need from a drop-down menu, Sterlingbuild list every size as a different product. So you have to scroll through reams of product listings to find the window type in the right size before you get to any information about the product itself. Not to mention, their site is riddled with duplicate content because 12 different sizes of product are not different products, they are the same product, just a different size, so they have the identical product description for numerous separate pages basically selling the same product. How on earth has Google decided this is the best website in the marketplace when it comes to roof windows?
Technical SEO | | LukeyB301 -
Mobile site ranking instead of/as well as desktop site in desktop SERPS
I have just noticed that the mobile version of my site is sometimes ranking in the desktop serps either instead of as well as the desktop site. It is not something that I have noticed in the past as it doesn't happen with the keywords that I track, which are highly competitive. It is happening for results that include our brand name, e.g '[brand name][search term]'. The mobile site is served with mobile optimised content from another URL. e.g wwww.domain.com/productpage redirects to m.domain.com/productpage for mobile. Sometimes I am only seen the mobile URL in the desktop SERPS, other times I am seeing both the desktop and mobile URL for the same product. My understanding is that the mobile URL should not be ranking at all in desktop SERPS, could we be being penalised for either bad redirects or duplicate content? Any ideas as to how I could further diagnose and solve the problem if you do believe that it could be harming rankings?
Technical SEO | | pugh0 -
Broken link
I know SEO Moz has a lot of info about 404 301 302 etc but I am trying to figure out easy way to fix two of the broken links from flash. I am redirecting following links with wordpress redirect plug in http://soobumimphotography.com/gallery.php?GalleryID=126&GalleryName=Wedding&OrderNum=1 http://soobumimphotography.com/gallery.php?GalleryID=126&GalleryName=Wedding&OrderNum=1 What would be the best way to solve this? Is there anyway I can remove those?
Technical SEO | | BistosAmerica0 -
Open Site Explorer - Link Data still not available
Hi, I still cant get access to any data for the URL www.attraction-tickets-direct.co.uk/walt-disney-world-orlando-tickets We changed this URL over two month ago and your site explains that it takes up to this amount of time to start getting data. This is really annoying as we would like this information for us to do a competitor anaylsis. Any idea when we should start recieving this? thanks
Technical SEO | | SEOConrad0