In the world of SEO, every link matters, and every link that can be earned, should be - it's the principle of "optimization." Yet, to this day, even many companies and sites that are focused on growing their search traffic don't think about optimizing the links they've earned. Case-in-point: The web forum software company, VBulletin. Have a look at these search results - allintitle:powered by vbulletin -site:vbulletin.com. All of these sites feature a footer similar to this:
It makes me want to cry.
Why? Because there's attribution, but no link. There are literally hundreds of millions of pages on the web that Google, Yahoo! and Live have indexed that contain the phrase "powered by VBulletin" in the title tag, yet virtually none of these pages actually link to VBulletin's site. A (relatively) paltry 1.2 million links and PageRank 6 are what VBulletin.com has to show for the terrific software they've created. Just imagine the SEO power of their domain had they gone the route Invision went and made those links default in their installation packages (they've got 15X VBulletin's links by Yahoo!'s count).
Another terrific example comes from an unlikely source - YouTube. Check out a standard YouTube embed code:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/anxkrm9uEJk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/anxkrm9uEJk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
No link! Unbelievable, but true. Now check out Vimeo's embed code:
<object width="400" height="302"> <param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /> <param name="movie" value="https://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf? clip_id=1020365&server=vimeo.com& show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=0&color=&fullscreen=1" /> <embed src="https://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=1020365&server=vimeo.com& show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=0&color=&fullscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="400" height="302"></embed></object><br /><a href="https://vimeo.com/1020365?pg=embed&sec=1020365">SEOmoz Whiteboard Friday-Blogging for Higher Rankings</a> from <a href="https://vimeo.com/user409469?pg=embed&sec=1020365">Scott Willoughby</a> on <a href="https://vimeo.com?pg=embed&sec=1020365">Vimeo</a>.
It's a little longer, but it contains three beautiful, relevant, anchor-text rich links to Vimeo's site.
If you're powering something, providing content, offering embeddable material or contributing in some fashion - automated or manual - you should be getting the link credit. It's still the only way the search engines are recognizing "votes" on the web, and I can think of few higher endorsements than the leveraging of a source's material on one's own site. These are links Google and the other engines want to find so they can provide proper attribution. Don't let them, or your search traffic, down.
Given Google's attitude toward link building (and most off-site SEO tactics, in general), is it any surprise that YouTube's code behaves this way? It's not an oversight - it's leading by example. Yes, it passes limited value to YouTube - but YouTube doesn't need it.
Now, if we're talking about enterprise-level brands that have little or no SEO savvy and are struggling to expand their Web visibility, then that's a horse of a different color (or a pig with a different shade of lipstick, as it were).
Very well said and analyzed the situation.
Big established sites can easily get away with such things, but I am just little concerned about a very new site trying to do this. Secondly, has anyone note the wordpress footer links making any difference ? I never saw any result with them!
Pushkar
Are footer links devalued? Absolutely, but they still pass some value. So a work-light, persistent method of getting links, even links with minimal value, is definitely worth investigating.
Now, are those links going to drive traffic? Probably not at all.
Other than they're one of the largest blog software apps out there? :o)
They wouldn't have succeeded if their app wasn't good but the promotion I'm sure helped spread the word!
Touche.
But - brand considerations aside - there's a certain amount of Browser Blindness that users have when it comes to the content of the standard page footer.
Yeah, I concede that (since I'm the same way)! :D
We use a template from JoomlaShack (good stuff, has proven to be bug free) and, while it is paid software, the TOS requries a link at the bottom of each page.
I was not super-jazzed about that, but we made the text very small and put a nofollow on it.
I have also noticed a fair number of third party things coming with difficult-to-remove attribution links.
So clearly there is a bit of an arms war going on.
-OT
Cant believe vBulletin let that one get away. I usually remove all the links and attribution if I can, especiallly page titles.
I actually disagree with this point - I dispise seeing lame web development compnay links at the bottom of poorly designed websites. Nothing about that activity earns a link.
If vBulletin is good then it will garner links naturally, an enforced link is non-editorial - why should you have to provide a link back for something that you purchased?
It may not looks so hot sometimes but from a marketing/branding and (arguably) SEO stand point, it does make sense.
You see an awesome blog/bulletin board/etc and wonder what it's running on? I've been there and the link is great to have.
Fair comment. I was a little extreme in my comment, I do see the value in such footer links.
However I also feel they should be earned and represent an active decision from the site owner - rather like the little "I love SEOMoz" buttons.
Plus I can't prove this, and its probably not accuate (Google frequently disapoints me with its level of sophistication) but if I was Google I could spot this type of linking a mile off algorithmically and would reduce the value of the links in an instant.
But what about well designed sites? It's amazing how many times very good designers have to fight tooth and nail for that lousy link in the footer, when it could mean not only SEO value but also referrals.
And OliverTaco is quite right: with clients getting much smarter about CSS, they just go behind your back and do something dodgy with your link (like a display: none;) even if you do your best to embed it in the theme/software, etc.
But you're right: at least it's worthwhile trying. Mm, this was a very morning rant for me, better go find some coffee :)
What vBulletin should do IMHO is have a checkbox option in the admin panel with:
Love vBulletin? Link to us: Yes/No
If it was disabled by default, this would pass the editorially awarded criteria. There's many people satisfied with the product/service they provide and i'm sure thousands of people would enable it.
It's not just links, it would make it easy for people browsing a site who go "wow this is a nice board" to click through and purchase a copy.
Just make it easy for people to link to you with a simple Yes/No instead of messing in templates and HTML which many aren't comfortable with.
Thanks Rand. This is something to keep in mind with content syndication too. Allbeit a slightly different situation, ensuring your brand/service name/etc. is a link rather than just text should be a standard practice for sure.
Happy Thursday All!
Levi
@trontastic
That's a very good point.
I am a bit dazzled about vbulletin failing so badly on that area of SEO
I can see the value of link attribution to the service provider and agree it's a reasonable term under some conditions (free or basic service)
If I pay for a service I don't want my customers or competition to know what white label products I used to put my site together. I want my customers to feel I spent a tremendous amount of effort designing and developing a site for them. I don't want my competition to copy my white label approach.
A lot of white labels offer to remove the powered by for a price as well as use your unique URL versus a subdomain.
If I do a major theme overhaul, I'll put a link to my site & a link to the theme's page on in the footer. If people choose to "nofollow" it, that's ok with me since one of my primary goals is making my site available to people who like what I've done. But I think it's a fair way to reward someone who's done work you're using for free.
If it's a paid theme, then I'd "nofollow" the link and tell the client they could remove the "nofollow" if they'd like to give me some SEO-love.
Rand - Thanks for the insight. I agree that every link matters, but am wondering your thoughts/experiences are on how heavily footer links weigh in, especially in light of this next comment? Yahoo's Priyank Garg said the following in an interview (https://moourl.com/zeczy) with Eric Enge:
Eric: Right. So part of what you are pointing at there is that relevance matters a lot. So getting a link from the bottom of a WordPress template that you create and distribute is completely irrelevant.
Priyank: Exactly, that’s the kind of thing that we are trying to do all the time. The irrelevant links at the bottom of a page, which will not be as valuable for a user, don’t add to the quality of the user experience, so we don’t account for those in our ranking. All of those links might still be useful for crawl discovery, but they won’t support the ranking.
I realize this is just Yahoo and not the other engines, but I'd presume that the others would be doing the same because it is a matter of relevance.
If vBulletin followed through with your advice, what measurable outcome would they likely see (e.g. more visits, higher PageRank, etc.)?
Right on Rand!
A link is a good thing to have.
Never overlook a chance to get one especially if it is earned.
Okay, I get the point. Don't forget to get the link for the work you do.
I don't need anymore reasons to smack my head, it looks funny enough already.
I think the basic principle still applies. I like how Rand was talking about "earning" instead of "building" links even 4 years ago. One question/comment I have now that it's 2012 concerns the whole concept of video SEO. In the two examples of embed code Rand gives, sure one is better than the other in terms linking back to the video host. However, ideally, wouldn't Wistia's embed code be better for your site if the video content was your own?
Does Wistia build in links back to their own domain in their embed codes? If so, wouldn't that be the very best example of a company that takes advantage of linking back to their site, while still enabling their clients to link back to their own Web sites too? Or does Wistia's code not take advantage of this opportunity for earning links back? Curious to know if Rand would be willing to comment on that. Thanks!
Hopefully, vBulletin never added an attribution link!
Otherwise they would probably be penalized by Penguin as WPMU back in 2012!
Would you still consider this as a valid statement today?
Really nice informaiton . I used to do these but now i keep in mind Thanks for sharing
i will keep this in mind. Thnaks once again Rand
The VBulletin example just blew me away..
Imagine if they had links also along with the attribution..
Awesome!!!
<i>It's a little longer, but it contains three beautiful, relevant, anchor-text rich links to Vimeo's site.</i>
And yet YouTube will rank well above Vimeo for any given phrase that both cover, at least on one major search engine. Favouritism is an ugly thing, eh?
Actually from my ten minute test Yahoo and Live video search also seem to favour YouTube well above Vimeo for a bunch of search terms you'd expect all the video sites to cover (e.g. "barack obama speech"). Are vimeo being penalized for enforced "widget-style" links? Or does YT's larger user base ensure they get more links even though they don't enforce them?
Interesting. I might do some proper testing on this.
I agree with Rand completely. Regardless of rather this is a footer link or some other link a link is going to help you rank.
Ahhhh! So that's why you guys chose Vimeo!
You would be amazed and disgusted at how many large companies fail to include these types of links.
There is definately a market for someone to fix this, assuming you could convince a potential client of the intrinsic value in doing so.
ADMAVEN - The Interactive Advertising Blog
https://admaven.blogspot.com
Good reminder! I have added a link to my home site anytime I do work (asking the customer's permission when appropriate). You're right about vBulletin - what a waste.
Thanks!
One interesting thing you didn't address is whether SEO's should enforce a link attribution on any sites they optimize.
Thoughts?
@vingold wow that's an excellent question. But I am sure google would kill any links that were going to any SEO becaues they optimized the site. I just can't imagine them letting them be. I am sure they would come up with some BS excuse, even though the link would be relevant and well deserved. Would love to hear others thoughts.
We recently had a discussion about that, and decided not to include links on sites we optimize. We don't particularly want our clients' competitors to know their sites have been optimized & go hire their own SEO firms, and we don't think our clients would want that either.
We do, however, require a link on the homepage of sites we design/develop.
I don't think web design/SEO firms should automatically include links on sites they develop. If they bring it up with client, and client is ok with it or even requests it, then no problem there. It's just important to prevent conflict of interest. Also there are cases where it would seem odd or inappropriate for a site to have links like that. It needs to be a case by case basis. The clients interests need to come first.
I do think it would create quite a pattern for competitors to follow if firms put links on every site developed/SEO'd.
However as Rand mentioned, software like vBulletin is a perfect candidate for attribution links, especially if it's an option you can turn off, but is turned on by default. I also agree that embedded content, widgets and tools ae definitely a great opportunity for links.
Maybe you should contact them and tell them about it. They might need your professional service.
Maybe, vBulletin doesn't use any links in copyright section, because they already get benefit from each license, $180 :)
Or rather, Invision Power Board team adds 2 links in copyright, although they sell licenses for $150.
That's definitely a head smacker for sure. And hey, aren't you supposed to be on vacation and planning the final details of a wedding?! :o)
I definitely think there's an open opportunity here, but if every developer, programmer, marketer, etc. thought of these sorts of things (among many others), how much need would there be for SEOs? ;)
Enjoyable post, I like this series.
The YouTube example is funny - I doubt they need to optimise themselves for Google, but for the other engines it could help. For what its worth, I've noticed Y!SE will count "links" to my sites which are actually just hotlinked images. Perhaps they would treat an embed the same way.
I agree this is a headsmacker as most of the software system type packages I have seen employ this tactic.
Alternately, I think it is in poor taste for companies that create websites, market websites, or host websites to include their link in the footer of their clients sites (with or without their client's blessing)... it seems sooo... tacky and low-rent... but this is just my humble opinion... I am sure others will disagree with me.
Great idea Rand, when I finish constructing the next YouTube beater I'll remember to include some backlinks!
Joking aside, it is a good reminder for people who create widgets and other 3rd party hosted tools.
1) but will youtube link to the video contributors...?
2) Will sites like propeller and digg link back to the story owners instead of 302 redirection?
3) are these "powered by" and other kinds of links worth enforcing?
4) Isn't enforcing against google's way of advicing people to build natural links? when it is enforced, it becomes something like buying links.The only difference is here you don't shell out money for buying them, but you provide a service or widget or a design/theme or whatever to buy them.But they are as good as paid links.
Rather i would go with vbulletins and youtubes current policies.
these are just my two cents as a counter argument, by keeping aside my SEO hat :)
I sometimes get "free" templates and web software in which the TOS says their logo must be shown at the bottom. And some of the web software actually renders the page with the banner in the page load so there is no physical way for me to delete the banner.
Usually, however, the logo is wrapped in a few div tags with classes or id's. So I'll access the logo through css and give it a Display:none; attribute to hide the logo. Therefore, its still in the page, but the users can't see it.
Exactly what I was talking about; and how's that fair to the person who worked LOTS of hours to provide you with that free resource?
When I came aboard at my company (they were just beginning to implement and sell SEO), they were smart enough to have had every site they built link back to our homepage and another large portal we own, but they were either images or the anchor text said the same thing (which wasn't keyword rich). I had a fun time explaining why these needed to be changed and even more fun going through and changing them. Great suggestion, Rand. Would have been nice to have these optimized from the get go. Can't beleive such large software companies would overlook an opportunity like that!
Rand, great info (emailed it to like 20 clients). :-)
Just as Randfish said "In the world of SEO, every link matters..."
You can add your website url in free submission directory for FREE!
Just go there: https://www.free-submission-directory.com