Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks for your answer.

This is not an affiliate link.  No money is passing hands.

The link has the format you can see above.  It is a direct link but has tracking code on it.

Do you think the tracking code would make the search engines think it is an affiliate link?

I have a client that has acquired a link from an influential partner but the partner has set the link up to have clicks tracked within their analytics.

Do links like this pass PageRank:

Anchor Text

OK.  Thanks for your time.

Yes I agree.  They certainly have a size issue.  Balancing the value of things across that many web pages is only going to throw up more issues than solutions.  So are they facing a losing battle with the growing size and complexity of the web and with balancing commercialness and neutrality in a way that makes it impossible to implement changes that will clean the results but jeopardise relationships with paying customers?

Thanks for your response.

I know there are multiple factors at play and for these clients we are doing social media work, PPC and email campaigns.

I'm really just surprised at often I'm seeing sites with spammy link profiles appear in the top ten when better quality sites with better (but maybe fewer) links appear further down.  I starting to suspect that Google are finding it impossible to write in parameters to the algorithm which deal with sites like these without devaluing legitimate sites.

What do you think?

Hi EGOL

Yes I agree and you would think that is the case but they are ranking at the top for reasonably competitive terms and better sites are already finding it hard to compete with them.

I'm totally up for the challenge but that's not really my point.  This is not an isolated example I see sites using these practices ranking high for a range of keywords in Google.  I can't write algorithms but I know the things I would be looking for if I did and these sites would be obvious to me.  I can't believe that Google don't know and can't do anything - so what's happening then?

Thanks.

I work with a couple of clients in the finance and debt area.  I've been doing loads of work examining the link profiles of the commercial sites at the top of the rankings and 70% of the links I am seeing are low value directories and sites obviously built for links with multiple outgoing links to completely unrelated sources!  When I examine the other links their isn't enough value in them to outweigh what looks to me like very obvious and spammy low quality link building.

Why can't Google see what I'm seeing - it's so obvious?  I know there are multiple factors at play but links like these should offer no value or get a site penalised (isn't that what Google tell us) but these sites still seem to be ranking because of them rather than despite them!

Hi EGOL

Yes I agree and you would think that is the case but they are ranking at the top for reasonably competitive terms and better sites are already finding it hard to compete with them.

I'm totally up for the challenge but that's not really my point.  This is not an isolated example I see sites using these practices ranking high for a range of keywords in Google.  I can't write algorithms but I know the things I would be looking for if I did and these sites would be obvious to me.  I can't believe that Google don't know and can't do anything - so what's happening then?

Thanks.