I run a small site that got hit hard by Google two years ago, because I wasn't quick enough to put "nofollow" tags on my paid links. Wasn't terribly happy at the time, but it seemed like other sites were hit as well, and in the long run, I figured it would all pan out. Most importantly, if ALL sites can't post paid links without "protection", it's still a level playing field as far as advertising revenue is concerned.
Today I've snooped a bit around and noticed that there are a ton of large and very prominent sites out there which are happily selling links without "protection". The <900 pound gorilla in my market>
is just one example - if you click on <a key link there>
, you'll arrive at a number of pages with healthy PR and big fat ads (I'm sure those cost handsomely).
I haven't paid much attention to new developments for a year or so, so before typing up this post, I checked the FAQ in this forum, but it seems like the rules of '07 still apply. Still I have the feeling that I'm missing something. I guess it would be too cheap to assume that the "big" sites can get away with anything, or that "nofollow" is simply a plot to drive ad revenue towards the strongest and most established sites. But something tells me that, once I start removing the "nofollow" tags from MY site and try and get some of the advertisers back which are now buying ads <from the 900 pound gorilla>
, I will be back to PR0 in no time at all.
Can somebody tell me what I am missing?
[edited by: tedster at 12:46 am (utc) on May 26, 2010]