| 11:33 am on Feb 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Have you thought about placing it in an iframe that is blocked from Googlebot?
| 7:43 pm on Feb 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
No, but will now. It's been years since I've done any coding, why have to rely on hacks from other webmasters who are still up to speed on those issues.
There's an option in creating the 'generated search box code' from the affiliate of having the results open in a new window, maybe that code I need to alter, but the initial request will go to the affiliate (i.e. when they click on the 'search' button after entering in parameters to the search box) so that should somehow be coded 'nofollow' - no?
| 10:21 pm on Feb 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
If you have a strong site with good amounts of unique, relevant content you should be fine.
Unfortunately most affiliates sites are not strong sites and rarely have significant amounts of unique and useful content. This has led many people to think that Google punishes affiliates sites. In reality they are punishing those sites not because of the affiliate links but because those sites often have nothing of value, just the affiliate links and affiliate data feeds that are duplicated on hundreds of other sites.
Google will likely still know what you are doing from the data they gather via toolbar users & the Google Chrome browser.
| 11:37 pm on Feb 29, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I didn't think of it that way goodroi, thanks much. Will still research a bit more before implementing them, as don't want to get bit in the rear, so to speak, when Google down the line does some comprehensive algo change that trickles down to someone using affiliates the way I am... why I am glad to get the 'nofollow' tags in the affiliate links (though are legit, not spam) thanks to the info here from other folks.
| 8:30 am on Mar 1, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|I've put rel="nofollow" on all affiliate links I have |
If Google trusts the site you linked to they will ignore the nofollow, it doesn't matter if you trust it or not anymore. I suspect they made that change in response to link sculpting, but only Google knows. I can only imagine that their system of ranking sites was becoming flawed from an over-use of nofollow.
I can offer ebay.com as an example of nofollow not working. They have an affiliate program and everyone links to items for sale using nofollow links through redirect scripts. Just over a year ago ebay required all webmasters to switch their 302 redirects(natural browser behavior) to 301 redirects(permanent) and the traffic charts speak for themselves - up 20%+ in the past year from Google alone. If nofollow worked the change would have done nothing.
| 7:09 pm on Mar 1, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Just over a year ago ebay required all webmasters to switch their 302 redirects(natural browser behavior) to 301 redirects(permanent) and the traffic charts speak for themselves - up 20%+ in the past year from Google alone. If nofollow worked the change would have done nothing. |
Interesting, if it is a direct cause and effect and no other ebay site updates/changes could have accounted for the increase in Google traffic/referrals.
Even so, to generalize the 'ebay effect' you've described, are you sure this can be applied across the board, to all use of 'nofollow'? To me, in my limited 'learning' mode of expertise (so sorry if this is ignorant) seems unlikely.
Maybe just some large, well-known affiliates have escaped the nofollow no link juice effect as the affiliate has earned Google trust.
Others may still be affected (as in no link juice) by nofollow linking and webmasters using affiliates that Google DOES NOT TRUST (or have been identified as spammers, etc.) and linking to them without nofollowing the links may receive penalties of some sort. No?