Affiliate links leak PR?

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Affiliate links leak PR?

Do affiliate links leak PR?

suggy

11:33 am on Nov 24, 2004 (gmt 0)

I see no reason why affiliate links wouldn't pass PR - other than all the variables they usually contain.

Does anyone know for sure / what's the general consensus on whether affiliate links leak PR?

If I replace the numerous affiliate links on my site with cgi redirects through a script (so the links look like '/cgi-bin/redirecter.pl?<affiliatelink>' is this going to stop leakage (if it occurs) and will it result in a Google penalty?!

So many questions. Help would be greatly appreciated!

Cheers,

Suggy

suggy

3:38 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

Ah-ha! I'm in!

Is it just me or does holding all new threads for mod vetting result in them 'appearing' halfway down the board where they often go unnoticed?

Anyway that's a diferrent subject! Your help/ discussion please...especially from the PR boffins (I can never get my head 'round those research papers).

matt21811

4:00 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

My take is

The value of a link is the PR of the page divided by the number of links on the page.

It doesnt matter if you link direct to the affiliate site or via a redirect because that bit of PR never comes back to any of your pages.
Also it doesnt reduce the link count on your page so you are not retaining more inside your site.

So how do you think it stops leakage?

suggy

4:53 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

I don't? That's why I am asking!

I suspect it does leak, but I would love for someone to inform me otherwise, as it would save a lot of work.

So, am I right in thinking that a page with...

>32 plain text main navigation links (internal)

>24 plain text affiliate links going to the main affiliate scheme intermediaries

... is losing nearly 43% of the PR it could be passing back to internal pages?!

steveb

5:54 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

The affiliate nature of the links doesn't mean anything. The 24 links definitely send PR off into oblivion that you could have used yourself.

suggy

6:02 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

Whoops! So, it's a simple division, so 43% is going AWOL, right?

OK, next question then, is Google going to penalise me for writing a simple cgi script that opens a new page with a redirect in the header?

eg "/cgi-bin/perl_script.cgi?redirect=afiliate_link?

And, will it prevent PR leakage? I presume google can't follow this link!

Thanks for your advice so far.

Suggy

steveb

6:09 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

Following the links doesn't matter. Seeing the href matters.

suggy

6:34 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

Hi steveb

Thanks for the advice so far. But, please excuse me for being a bit of a thickie.

If I put <a href="http://www.mydoman.com/cgi-bin/perl_script.pl?redirect=http://www.affiliatelink.html">

Where is the PR going to go. Or is it just going to be lost in cyberspace?

fclark

9:03 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

It seems the pr goes to the script itself:

http://www.mydoman.com/cgi-bin/perl_script.pl

based on the fact that my redirect script ranks higher than any other page on the site.

suggy

9:41 pm on Nov 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

Oh dear, that's not a great outcome either!

So, if it's basically the <a href... that causes the leak, one needs to do something fancy with javascript/ cgi so a <a href... isn't used...right...

Any ideas?!

Suggy

fclark

1:47 am on Dec 4, 2004 (gmt 0)

I'm trying the use of form image butons with the aff link in the form action to send visitors to aff sites now. Works great with image ads (e.g. a 468x60 button). Can even do it with image that looks like text link.

Does anyone know for sure if link in the "action=" is seen by G?