Too Many On Page Links, rel="nofollow" and rel="external"
-
Hi,
Though similar to other questions on here I haven't found any other examples of sites in the same position as mine.
It's an e-commerce site for mobile phones that has product pages for each phone we sell. Each tariff that is available on each phone links through to the checkout/transfer page on the respective mobile phone network. Therefore when the networks offer 62 different tariffs that are available on a single phone that means we automatically start with 62 on page links that helps to quickly tip us over the 100 link threshold.
Currently, we mark these up as rel="external" but I'm wondering if there isn't a better way to help the situation and prevent us being penalised for having too many links on page so:
- Can/should we mark these up as rel="nofollow" instead of, or as well as, rel="external"?
- Is it inherently a problem from a technical SEO point of view?
- Does anyone have any similar experiences or examples that might help myself or others?
As always, any help or advice would be much appreciated
-
How is your transfer page working, technically - it seems to be resolving as a straight 200 for me. Those transfer pages are usually where affiliates start to get creative (they might 302, for example).
-
Thanks Tela.
I think you might be on to something here. You're right that the worry is looking needlessly spammy by having too many affiliate links on page and also about conserving link juice.
It's something I'll have to speak to our development team about because generating the tariff code dynamically might take a fair bit of work. It's definitely an idea I think we should investigate.
Regarding the interstitial URL/step after the user select the phone they want - there is already a 'transfer page' that holds them for a few seconds before taking them to the network's basket/checkout. I fear that adding yet another step before that would have a negative impact on the customer journey as we already see people dropping out in the post-transfer stage before completing the sale.
Cheers for the help.
-
Thanks Dr Pete.
The target page takes the customer to a dynamic 'transfer' page with affiliate tracking information that ensures the sale gets attributed to us. We have to do this because we don't have our own cart/checkout system. It's not an affiliate link swapping program or anything dubious - we don't actually get linked back to by the networks. I'd have thought Google was used to handling official affiliate programs.
I can totally see why it would look bad to Google by having this many external affiliate links on page but there is little we can do about the number of deals that the network offers. Our system of showing a restricted number of deals upon landing with the option to see 10 more at a time helps deal with UX issues.
It's reassuring to note that it is less of an issue because it is a deeper page than the home page.
Seeing as we are official affiliates to the major networks can you recommend any practices or techniques to mitigate the impact of large numbers of affiliate links to their sites?
-
I agree with Dr. Pete that this seems like the same sort of challenge that affiliate links have, even if this isn't a standard affiliate program link. It sounds to me like there might be a UI/UX solution that could address this issue.
Could you add an intersticial URL / step after the user selects the phone they want that contains the tariff codes? Could you use a selector on the page to let the user select and generate the link with the tariff code dynamically, thus having one on-page URL conserving link juice? Just a couple of ideas, but it seems like the real issue is conserving link juice, and it's not necessary to keep the on-page links under the 100 link limit.
-
Since these are really external links, it's a bit different calculus, especially since they're deeper on the site. "Nofollow" won't really help from a link juice perspective (it still gets burnt), although it would disavow those links, in a sense.
How is the target page redirecting to the outside site? I'm having a hard time telling with header checkers. That could impact the SEO implications quite a bit. This almost seems like an affiliate link sort of scenario, so it's more a matter of how Google sees the hundreds of links between these two sites.
They're definitely burning up some internal link equity, but at this level of the site (search results to product pages), that's not as big of an issue as if this were the home-page or a major category page, etc.
-
I get what you're saying. That's the general SEO best practice that I'm aware of. I was just looking for something a bit deeper than general kind of guidance.
Our user navigation isn't ideal (sadly there's not much as SEO I can do about it) but with the right filters and options it works ok. We can't really remove the links because they are the tariff options as they come through from the networks themselves. We do however show a tailored few when people land on the page with the option to see all deals.
With that in mind I'm essentially asking is there a better way to markup these links than with rel="external"? They are external links after all but we don't want to risk having this many links on the page cause negative side effects.
The user experience is generally fine and the number of links is fixed. I wonder if we can't do better with what we currently have by improving our PR distribution somehow.
Here is an example of a product page:
-
you can have over 100 links on a page now. that was an old rule when Google had limited bandwidth and the crawler would abandon a page acter following a certain number of links. now google sucks up whatever there is on a page.
do what makes most sense for user navigation. too many links can be overkill or might fit perfectly into your model.
Keep in mind you are really splitting up your PR by having so many links and pushing pr to all pages instead of the main ones.
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
-
Have you changed 100's of links on your site? Tell me the why's, the how's and what's!
Hello there. If you've changed 100's of links, then I'd like for you to contribute to this thread. I've created a new URL structure for a website with 500+ posts in an effort to make it more user friendly, and more accessible to crawlers. I was just about to pull the trigger, when I started reading up on the subject and found that I might have a few surprises waiting for me around the corner. The status of my site. 500 posts 10 different categories 50+ tags No Backlinks No recent hits (according to Google Analytics) No rankings. I'm going to keep roughly 75% of the posts, and put them in different (new) categories to strengthen SEO for the topic which I'd like to rank multiple categories for, and also sorted a list with content which I'd like to 410. Created new structure created new categories Compiled list of old URLs, and new URLs New H1, Meta Title & Descriptions New tags It looks simple on paper, but I've got problems executing it. **Question 1. **What do I need to keep in mind when deleting posts, categories, and tags - besides 410, Google URL removal? Question 2. What do I do with all the old posts that I am going to re-direct? Each post has between 10-15 internal links. I've started manually removing each link in old posts before 301'ing them. The reason I'm doing this is control the UX, as well as internal link juice to strengthen main categories. Am I on the right path? On a side note, I've prepared for the 301'ing by changing the H1's, meta data and adding alt text to images. But I can't help but to think that just deleting the old posts, and copying over the content to the new url (with the original dates set) would be a better alternative. Any contribution to this thread would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Web Design | | Dan-Louis1 -
Do search engines see copy/keywords when it appears only at the bottom of a page?
My client is looking to improve their SEO, and to date I've written meta data and made some initial recommendations. Thing is, on some of their pages, the body copy appears at the bottom of the page, past links and big, splashy images. My question is, will search engines even see that copy to crawl it for keywords? Thanks!
Web Design | | MarcieHill0 -
Do pull quotes affect SEO positively or negatively?
I like the design element of a pull quote to ad interest and highlight an important point. If I use an exact quote from the page in a pull quote on that page, does that negatively affect SEO as duplicate content? Are there formatting or tagging methods that could help pull quotes to boost SEO? For clarity, by "pull quote" I mean a stylized bit of text that floats on a page in such a way that the body text wraps around it. It is actual text (not text embedded in a graphic) but it behaves like an image with text wrapping around it. Here's an example (in red on the right side): http://www.21ct.com/resources/news-room/21ct-announces-its-latest-us-patent-for-advancing-big-data-security/
Web Design | | kyle21ct0 -
Question #2: All of my INTERNAL links in OSE are being indexed from http://www.e.com/default.asp, and all my EXTERNAL links are linked to http://www.e.com/ am I getting a fraction of the link juice because of that?????
Hey guys, sorry for the really long question, but it appears that I am losing between 50 and 75 % of my link juice to my internal pages. In OSE all main category links (left sidebar) are being indexed from the URL that includes default.asp, even though NONE of my external links include that: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/links?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uncommonthread.com%2FSulky-Thread-s%2F78.htm If you check the PA for http://www.uncommonthread.com/: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/links?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uncommonthread.com%2F You see that it is practically double the PA of http://www.uncommonthread.com/default.asp: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/links?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uncommonthread.com%2FDefault.asp **Also, non of my internal menu links are being indexed. ** Look at the menu on this page: http://www.uncommonthread.com/Sulky-Thread-s/78.htm and then look at the OSE information here for the "invisible thread" item from the menu on the page above^^^: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/links?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uncommonthread.com%2FSulky-monofilament-s%2F54.htm Thanks SOOO much! Pre-thumbs and thanks to anyone that can lend me a seconds worth of advice! Thanks again for your time, Tyler A.
Web Design | | TylerAbernethy0 -
Anyone have a good example of a CSS-based multi-level nav bar that is semantic (including link level subordination) and is ux positive?
Anyone have a good example of CSS-based multi-level nav bar that is semantic (including link level subordination) and is ux positive? Or am I gonna have to actually make one? Anyone have a good example of CSS-based multi-level nav bar that is semantic (including link level subordination) and is ux positive? Or am I gonna have to actually make one?
Web Design | | anns0 -
Using "#" anchors to display different content
If I have a page that has an area on the page that acts like a widget and has three different tabs. These tabs provide 3 different types of information relevant to the page subject matter. By default when someone goes to the page one of the tabs is showing but you have to click on the others to see the info on them. Is it OK to use domain.com/topic#TAB1, domain.com/topic#TAB2, domain.com/topic#TAB3 to create shortcut links so that people can land on the page and have that predetermined tab showing. I'm wondering what search engines might think. Essentially all the content of all three tabs is there for people to see but they'd have to click to see the other tabs. I don't consider the content to be hidden. But I'd like to hear people's thoughts.
Web Design | | Business.com0