"SEO Dave" <seo-dav...@AMsearch-engine-optimization-services.co.uk> wrote in
message news:o0oto0paf65j1qcv8cemv20s8nvdlb6nk0@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 07:18:17 GMT, from_
...@nomail.com (C.W.) wrote:
[snip]
>>>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.
> It may sound overly dramatic, but it isn't.
> 1. The reality is every link from a site reduces that sites PR, that's
> a fact that can't be argued.
> 2. If the link has no relevance to the sites content the anchor text
> will not benefit any page on the site. i.e. If you sell shoes and link
> to a site with anchor text "SEO Firm", that anchor text will not help
> the pages shoe SERPs. A similar link to another shoe site (could be to
> a competitor) with anchor text "Shoes for Sale" will help any page on
> the site with SERPs related to Shoes for Sale (you still loose PR).
> 3. By adding unrelated links to a page you will impact keyword density
> etc...
> 4. The anchor text of links on a page are given more weight than
> standard body text. By linking to a unrelated site some of that
> benefit will not go to the other presumably targeted anchor text on
> the page.
> Every link, every word you add to a page will have an impact on the
> pages SERPs and in the case of links the sites SERPs. SEOs should know
> this and so should know adding a link to their site is not in the best
> interests of the clients site.
is aware of how PR works, as any SEO would be, then taking any amount of PR
is wrong. It is not the same for a design firm, as they often are unaware
of doing harm.
I guess that this is not a discussion about what is ethical, since ethics
are not "situational". It is either wrong or it isn't.
About PR: PR, while not unimportant, is certainly not the only thing that
matters. There are examples of relatively low PR pages ahead of a page with
higher PR in any search you conduct. PR matters, but not that much, and it
is advantage is certainly less clear than it was in the past.
About keyword density: If adding a link to an SEO site damages the keyword
density to the point that it actually affects the site's performance, then
the SEO certainly hasn't done their work. I'm sure you know how difficult
it is to positively affect keyword density. That point seems almost
irrelevant to me, or at the very least, insignificant.
About advertising: The only way that the link would have any value at all to
an SEO would be if someone could see it. If the client site is not found,
then no one sees the link and it does no good. To use the billboard
example, it is like a billboard on a back road.
Here's the reason why I would not find that to be offensive in the least,
morally, ethically, or any other way you'd care to measure.
Imagine that an SEO firm takes on a client. The client's site has PR4 with
two inbound links showing in Google. The site is essentially invisible in
the search engines.
The SEO optimizes the site according to the accepted practices of the day.
The client site now performs well in the search engines. In addition, the
client site is ahead of many other sites in the serps that have much higher
PR. As a result of the SEO work, the site has acceptable keyword density,
increased PR, and dozens (hundreds?) of inbound links.
The SEO asks permission to put a link to the SEO's site on the client site,
correctly pointing out that it might reduce the effect of PR on that page.
To put into perspective for the client when they ask about it, the SEO
points out (also correct) that the client site is currently ahead of sites
that have higher PR.
In addition, the SEO points out that a link from the client site adds to the
PR of the SEO site and a link from the SEO site to the client site adds to
the PR of the client site. If the client site is not the net beneficiary of
an exchange like that then the exchange should not be proposed. I think
that was your point, wasn't it?
Finally, my point. One situation - two points of view. What I am trying to
say in the above example, is that you might steer clear of an SEO that
doesn't exchange links with a client, because they might not be doing
everything they can to help their client, retaining all the PR they can for
their own purposes.
MM
|
