Forum Moderators: martinibuster
The question came up in the Google webmaster hangout today and John Mueller recommends that any webmaster deciding to include a “designed by” link in the footer uses no follow if they want to include their link.
'nofollow' is supposed to mean 'paid for' or 'not vouched for'
My client links are neither. Nor are they site-wide. I ask for one on the index page, but I don't insist on it. My dev projects are bespoke, and I choose them these days. If the client agrees, I want credit.
I get work from these links. Not every client gives them. They're on my brand name. Why should I pretend they're not genuine? Why should I flag them as paid? The client has made an editorial decision to credit my company as the outfit responsible for the work done.
They are a recommendation, and they are freely given (if asked for).
Idle query: If you're not prepared to vouch for the work of the person who designed your website, why did you let them design the site in the first place?
The credit is for "paid for" work
its an advert exclusive for you
Its advertising not editorializing
The credit is for "paid for" work
No it's not.They pay me, not the other way round.
its an advert exclusive for you
No it's not. If I had a whole page on their site with a testimonial and a puff for my services and only one link out then that would be exclusive; as it is I have a small credit, on a page with loads of other links, as the outfit responsible for the work. By your definition every single link on the internet is an 'exclusive advert' - it only points to one place right?
Its advertising not editorializing
No it's not. Read what I wrote above. I ask for them sometimes, but I don't insist on them; it's not in the contract.
Here's Google's official guidance: [support.google.com...]
Nowhere in there does it state that what I do is in some way 'naughty' or even borderline.
Paid links: A site's ranking in Google search results is partly based on analysis of those sites that link to it. In order to prevent paid links from influencing search results and negatively impacting users, we urge webmasters use nofollow on such links. Search engine guidelines require machine-readable disclosure of paid links in the same way that consumers online and offline appreciate disclosure of paid relationships (for example, a full-page newspaper ad may be headed by the word "Advertisement"). More information on Google's stance on paid links.
...wanting a 'followed link' just shows the desire for shared link juice.
Almost all naturally links are completely irrelevant to the website topics as anchors like click here, www, website, read more, etc.
[edited by: martinibuster at 6:47 pm (utc) on Mar 27, 2015]
On a sidenote, do you think there's any negative impact in changing anchor text in the way described?
Anyone except the banned will rank for their brand name.
...then there is no need for the link, as any potential business will be able to find the developer with a couple of clicks.
I know two very good designers in California who have a long history of producing quality work for the likes of Wells Fargo and Berkeley University. Neither of them rank for phrases. I know them through word of mouth. They were recommended to me. I have recommended them to others. Referrals are a major source of clients to them. A link in the footer, even no-followed, is a traditional form of referral that has antecedents and analogues in the offline world that preceded the Internet. "Designed by" credits preceded the Internet. They were carried over into web design. Designed by credits have a place in the Internet outside of link popularity. They serve as a system for generating referrals.
Why should i advertise a company, indefinitely...
