| Footer Links | "L" Plates | 6/16/12 12:31 AM | From a Learner - I have 2 websites. If I place a footer link from site A (100 pages) to site B (50 pages) This will then create a link from every page on site A to every page on Site B.It also means that the anchor text will be the same on every page |
| Re: Footer Links | ShopSafe | 6/16/12 12:52 AM | Hello "L" Plates. I am not an expert but I would go ahead and do it if your two websites are related. There's no other way to do it that makes sense. If it concerns you a lot, you could always use rel="nofollow" but I wouldn't bother with that either |
| Re: Footer Links | Geminineil | 6/16/12 6:32 AM | For me the KEY word is the IF - IF not related in anyway in content then don't interlink. IF they are related closely then why aren't they on the same website? To be on the safe side and not be trying to get cheap back links don't link at all. IMHO |
| Re: Footer Links | "L" Plates | 6/16/12 3:36 PM | Thank you. The websites are related in that they are both Tourist information and accommodation guides.They are for different regions and therefore have their own Domain names for example Sydney and Melbourne. |
| Re: Footer Links | StevieD_Web | 6/16/12 6:36 PM | then they are either just marginally related (ie nobody visits the one region would ever visit the other region) then they should have the least amount of interlinking possible.... maybe on the about page but never in the footer...... or they are mas |
| Re: Footer Links | ShopSafe | 6/16/12 7:06 PM | I don't see a problem with that at all. I've seen authoritative sources saying that is acceptable behaviour. I agree with Geminineil though, if they are not related, you shouldn't do it. |
| Re: Footer Links | ShopSafe | 6/16/12 7:14 PM | Sorry StevieDWeb, I did not see you posting there. I do not agree with you though. The footer is exactly the place where the advertisement of these relationships belong. Google knows how to interpret these, if you look around you will find recent sta |
| Re: Footer Links | fathom | 6/16/12 10:43 PM | I thought you said you weren't an expert? Google guidelines state there is no problem with advertising... (will assume advertising anywhere on the page includes the footer) so long as you add the rel="nofollow" attribute. So add the rel="nofollow" at |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/17/12 11:13 AM | I too link sites within the footer and I would not use nofollow. Wordpress sponsored themes footer links are a little different, sponsor a theme and it can be used on any amount of spammy sites. |
| Re: Footer Links | fathom | 6/17/12 11:54 AM | Contrary to that point... the claim wasn't "all those spammy websites" (admittedly we don't know but...) I'm sure there are questionable domains with questionable content and reasons for lack of value... but in that event, I would say you believe Neg |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/17/12 12:25 PM | If all there is too 'prove' footer links are bad is a post from webmaster world without the full details - that says something. Imagine this forum if users posted without giving their details - you would get one version of events and so not really cr |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 12:43 PM | squibble, you mean like this http://www.amazon.com/ LOL |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 12:47 PM | confucius says: Don't do like the big brand name sites are allowed to do or you will be swatted like a bug. |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/17/12 1:06 PM | The amazon links do not look like spam to me. They look quite useful on the page. I see no issue there. |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 1:15 PM | But it appears Google sees non-brand name websites with that many links at the bottom footer as an issue? Or possibly they do not but from what some have said on this group I would think they would. Amazon is not using rel=nofollow. Sure some will |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/17/12 2:12 PM | I do not see where Google thinks that links like this are an issue. This forum has years of threads to reference and within them you would expect to find point of official reference, that you dont find any threads where footer links (as seen) are men |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 2:26 PM | Matt and the video is from Aug 20, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0fgh5RIHdE So not to disagree so much as think you are basically correct squibble, but I think most people are spooked enough now that even if any external site links in a foot |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/17/12 3:20 PM | The amazon links are not paid links, there is no need to nofollow 'just in case' Google thinks they are paid links, I have not seen any evidence of non-paid links being interpreted as paid links. If this is a concern, this video tackles that > How sh |
| Re: Footer Links | Geminineil | 6/17/12 3:22 PM | Not so much a 'footer' link but I had someone link to me (who I did NOT ask for) who had a site-wide template and I ended up with 80,000 links.. from one domain.;.. all 'follow'... |
| Re: Footer Links | fathom | 6/17/12 3:26 PM | so 50/100 links to other domains on the footer looks ok to you but 2 hours early the same 50/100 links on the footer would be spammy... that seems a little odd. What changed? |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 3:28 PM | Could be semantics, but I consider any link that a business makes money from a paid link. If Amazon owns most of those external sites, then they indeed make money from them and likely gain in serp which according to Google's guidelines is wrong. |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/17/12 3:28 PM | What changed is that a real life example was posted, so I took a look and it did not appear to be spammy. |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 3:33 PM | squibble thanks for the video link. He does say if only linking once. I think Amazon has those on every one of their pages. Amazon is also not doing any disclosure that they own the sites. Again, think it goes back to it is ok if the big brand na |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/17/12 3:41 PM | Not really as it is obvious that amazon own the sites and a manual reviewer would see that straight away and it would be hard to imagine that a manual reviewer would think these were paid links. Where you say it is okay for the big brands - have you |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 3:45 PM | squibble, you are correct as was about to write something similar. I believe it is ok to interlink domains by the same owner but enough people here in this group I think (but could be wrong) might consider that spammy. I still say but again semanti |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 3:47 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | fathom | 6/17/12 6:14 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 6:33 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 6:37 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 6:56 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | fathom | 6/17/12 7:11 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 7:17 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 7:27 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 7:36 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 7:43 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 7:59 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | fathom | 6/17/12 8:42 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | Panda_Effects | 6/17/12 8:56 PM | |
| Re: Footer Links | ѕquibble | 6/18/12 12:40 AM |