PR and link monitoring

[mattrix]

Hi,

Suppose you have two sites, www.mysite.com and www.outgoinglinksite.com and that you put an outgoing link on www.outgoinglinksite.com pointing to www.mysite.com

If it is a a direct link, i.e. <a href="www.mysite.com">my keywords</a> then www.mysite.com will definitely realise a benefit in terms of gaining an inbound link.

Suppose, however, that the link was now monitored on www.outgoinglinksite.com and a visitor was then redirected to www.mysite.com, e.g. <a href="www.outgoinglinksite.com?url=www.mysite.com">my keywords</a>.

Does Google consider the second case to be a proper inbound link - will it add to your link popularity / PR?

[Quadrille]

It isn't a 'proper link', so Google does not read it that way.

Keep your links simple - A > B; if you want to redirect with any conceivable SEO benfit, use a 301 permanent redirect.

But if you want to send the reader from A to C, then make the link A > C, not A > B?*&C.

Google has many more PHDs than the average desktop PC; mess with them at your own risk. ;)

[mattrix]

I understand it isn't technically a proper link but, to any unassuming visitor, it is exactly the same in both cases. In google's model the idea of PR is loosely based on the probability of a visitor randomly landing up on your site. With this in mind, what should it matter whether the originating site tracks the link or not.

The link in question is also on another site which is set up to link to mine so I do not have control over its setup.

Any other thoughts?

[Quadrille]

Yes.

If you want a link, set a link.

The only reason I think of to do what you seem to be doing is the game Google.

As I said, it ain't going to work; fooling the average visitor may seem clever, but if Google penalizes you, you won't get many average visitors, or even non-average visitors.

Keep it simple; mess with Google by all means; but you'll have to get up a little earlier in the morning than playing 2002 games with URLs (tip: it's been thought of before).

Good Luck :(