>> If there is permission to add a link and in the case of an SEO firm
>> who should understand how adding a link from a clients site to their
>> SEO site will not benefit the client site explains the cons of this
>> arrangement, then I don't see a problem.

> Say I design a site for someone and I state upfront that in exhange
> for my services I will place a link on the site's pages I worked on
> [no discount]. I look at the footer of some sites I come across that I
> like the layout/design of - to see who did the work. I sort of expect
> to see it if the site owner had someone else do the site design for
> them. Part of the deal as far as I am concerned - just like the phone
> number listed on a billboard of the company to contact if you too want
> to advertise on a billboard.

> So if I put my link there - it is there _not_ for the oh-so-precious
> PR but to let others, visiting that site, who did the site design and
> maybe consider contacting me for the same services.

> No, I won't go into the following:

>> I want to put a link to our
>> unrelated SEO site on every page, oh and BTW it's going to reduce the
>> over all PR of your site and so you will most likely not do as well
>> in the search engines compared to had we not added the links!

> Why? Because it sounds way overly-dramatic.

> If it is ok to share or sell link space to unrelated site, then it is
> ok to share links to an unrelated site. 'Nuff said. Doesn't matter if
> that unrelated site is an SEO company or nursery rhyme site - it's a
> link and likely one that the person, who owns the site, can _see_ is
> there on the page since it is visible in the footer.

> Greatly reduce the overall PR of a site? Please. I seriously doubt
> _one_ link, with an anchor text of 4 to 5 words maybe, even site wide
> will "greatly reduce the overall PR of a site". I am looking at my own
> sites, where I share an unrelated footer link site wide, and I don't
> se how or where it held me back any by sharing it there.

> If it was 10 links or 20 or so, and less than 5% reciprocated, then I
> would see how the "PR Drain" argument could be applied ... but _one_,
> to someone who helped them with their site [design, seo, whatever], is
> going to just suck the PR right out of that site? Doubt it.

> Particularly since I didn't see ONE post sharing that thought when
> someone, last week, posted a request for wanting to pay for site-wide
> links from PR4 or above sites. Not one person - not even you - posted
> about sites that would carry would site-side link would suffer a PR
> drain and not do as well in search engines due to the link being
> 'unrelated'. Instead I bet the person had some people contacting him
> saying "sure, you can share your link[s] on my site - how much will
> you pay me?" Times in the past I have mentioned about themed links
> [related to content] I seem to recall there were a some folks happy to
> chime in a thought about "a link is a link - themed or not" or that
> there wasn't any felt proof that Google or Yahoo cared about themed
> links.

> Granted on Google - and only on Google - I may get some PR flow as a
> result; depends though on how many links the person has on that page
> on if I will benefit just a little bit. Whereas a link from my site,
> from a page with links to folks' sites I worked on, may not have a lot
> of links shared on it ... so I will flow some of that PR right back to
> them. So shucks - if unrelated site links harms sites - then I would
> be harming myself more by sharing all them unrelated links to sites I
> worked on, huh?

> And yes, I will get some backlinks as a rsult of that footer link. But
> I would get some backlinks if I paid Joe Blow to have my link listed
> site-wide. Only with the former, I had to work and satisfy the person
> with my work before I got to share that link. Otherwise it wouldn't be
> there. So in a way - I had to work on _earning_ that link.

> Sorry, but if the OP had not mentioned about the footer link being to
> an SEO company - I doubt anyone would found fault with it. I find it
> humorous that _just because_ it is an SEO firm's link,and one that
> worked on the site, that all of the sudden it is a wholly different
> story and draining the sites of PR and not having them do as well in
> search engines.

> *yes, still devil's advocating here. But likely my last devilish post*

> Carol