How To Get More Pages Indexed With Nofollow

I knew Chapter 4 of SEO Fast Start (on site structure) was going to be just a little bit controversial… but it really shouldn’t be. In this post I will briefly give some facts about where we are, controversy-wise, just to get you up to speed. I hope that a brief statement of the facts and a little explanation will help you filter out the noise that’s going around about this subject.

The timing is interesting, because I had already planned a tutorial for this week, on the pros, cons, ins, outs, and reasons for using "dynamic linking" (nofollow is just a tool) within your site… then a great new tool was released that makes the whole thing a lot easier… and along comes the sound and fury of controversy to make it "topical."

If you’re not interested in the controversy and just want to learn how to use nofollow, don’t worry, because I’ll get to the meat pretty quickly. (If you don’t know what nofollow means, you may want to read the book first).

The Nofollow Controversy Rages – But Why?

Google’s reps have been telling us for over a year that it’s OK to use nofollow on your own internal links, although they usually emphasize that it’s not good for guaranteeing that a page will not be indexed, since they may find other links that aren’t nofollowed. This is actually an important feature that we make full use of in dynamic linking, BTW. Anyone who tells you that using nofollow means removing pages from the index simply doesn’t understand it yet.

Last week, Rand Fishkin published an interview with Google’s Matt Cutts. Matt repeated, in plain English, that it’s perfectly safe to use nofollow on your internal links, to control the flow of PageRank within your own site. I thought this would end the controversy, but Rand’s interpretation of Matt’s comments left an opening for the semantic parsers of the world to pick a fight.

Rand’s words: 

Nofollow is now, officially, a "tool" that power users and webmasters should be employing on their sites as a way to control the flow of link juice and point it in the very best directions.

If you replace the word "should" with "could" then nobody would have a nit to pick… but he did say "should" so let me deal with that.

The Big Question – Should You Use Nofollow?

My answer to this question is an unqualified "maybe!" I can’t really stand behind that answer with pride, because it’s no kind of answer at all, so maybe I should explain a bit more…

In SEO Fast Start, I answered "yes," but the implementation is very limited, because while the "fast start" method is intended to be a framework for all SEOs, the book itself was primarily written as a beginner’s guide.

So for beginners, I described a very minimal implementation that involves nofollowing some links to "overhead pages" like privacy policies, contact info, terms & conditions, etc. This is a "play it safe" approach, which should at least deliver some benefits.

Once you get past a very minimal implementation, it’s very easy to screw things up. So, if you don’t truly grok how PageRank works, you probably don’t want to mess around with it. Although I did outline several "advanced" nofollow & dynamic linking techniques in the book, I claim no responsibility for your ability to understand PageRank.

The #1 Goal Is To Get More Pages Indexed

Before I go any further, let me explain why you might want to control the flow of PageRank within your site. It boils down to one major goal – index penetration. If you can get a little bit more PageRank to your most important content, by taking some away from less important content, you just might be able to get more of your pages into Google’s index. That’s it – that’s the key point. Getting more of your important pages indexed.

If you expect to funnel so much extra PageRank to your "money pages" that they will leap to the top of the rankings, then you’re probably dreaming, because you can only accomplish so much with changes to your site structure. The primary impact on your "money pages" will come from getting more of your other pages indexed, because the additional pages can be used to link (with appropriate anchor text) into your money pages.

Now, if your site is so small that you could literally link to every page from the home page (<150 pages), the minimal implementation (as described in Chapter 4 of SEOFS) is about all you’d ever want to do. Likewise, if your site has very little PageRank coming in from external links, then you probably have bigger fish to fry, so do the minimal implementation, if that, and get to work on more important stuff.

If you have a large site, with a lot of sitewide links to "overhead" pages, and you’re having a hard time getting your deeper pages indexed, then changes to your site structure can make a big difference in how many pages get indexed. One of my students worked through a major site restructuring last year, and went from a few hundred to over 1000 pages indexed – with significant gains in traffic and sales.

The Real Issue Is Site Structure – Nofollow Is Just A Tool

No matter what your situation, the key question isn’t really about nofollow at all. The key question is whether you can improve your position with search engines by changing the internal linking structure of your web site. Most of us can do at least a little bit better, because it’s very unlikely that you’ve developed the optimal structure by chance.

Once you’ve decided to make changes to your linking structure, it’s really down to making choices about the methods you’re going to use. Using nofollow allows you to "cut" links out of the PageRank calculation, without taking them away from users. This makes the nofollow attribute a handy tool, because you can make some kinds of structural modifications transparent to your site’s users.

For the sake of usability, you probably want links to your privacy policy, shopping cart, terms & conditions, contact information, etc. on every page. In fact, you may want some of those pages indexed (contact information) because people do use site: searches to find that kind of information… the question is whether you want those "overhead pages" to be more important (have more PageRank) than your real content (product pages, etc.)

How PageRank Flows Inside Your Site

PageRank, to misquote a friend of ours, is a very subtle beast. PageRank attempts to decide which of the pages you’re linking to are more important, by simulating a "random surfer" who blunders around the site, clicking links. The more times the random surfer stumbles across a given page, the more PageRank it has.

When this random surfer does his work at the scale of the web, the result is wonderful. Important web sites and even particularly important pages (those cited frequently on the web at large) end up with more PageRank. It’s a good thing. Link spam influences it to a degree, but you’d have to be one hell of a spammer to get more PageRank than, say, Amazon.com. Link spam probably has a lot more influence because of anchor text than it does on PageRank. You can hate Google if you like, but PageRank is a beautiful innovation.

Anyway… back to the point.

One of the "subtle things" about PageRank is that the amount flowing out of a page is divided up between all the links on the page. If there are 10 links, each one gets one tenth. If there are 100 links, each one gets 1% of the PageRank that flows out from the page. So removing a link means that the other links carry more weight. If one out of every five links points to an "overhead" page, then 20% of your PageRank is flowing into pages that you don’t really care about very much from an SEO perspective. But you need those links, don’t you?

PageRank works great at the scale of the web, but not so well once it gets inside of your web site. That’s because your web site will have a lot of links that you need for accessibility, usability or legal compliance, which lead to pages that aren’t especially interesting or important. Nobody "out there" on the web is linking to your "earnings disclaimer" page, but if you have to have one, you probably have to link to it from every page on your site.

It actually helps to understand this if you put yourself in the position of the spider, and pretend you’re standing on the home page, faced with dozens of links that all look the same. To borrow from Crowther & Woods, it appears to be "a maze of twisty little passages, all alike."

Unless you do something about it, the overhead pages on your site get more PageRank than they really deserve. You can remove these overhead pages from the index by using robots.txt or a robots meta tag, but completely removing them actually reduces the total amount of PageRank inside your site.

Completely blocking spiders from these pages also means that they can’t be found by visitors using a site: search, so it’s not the greatest thing you could ever do for usability – what if someone is trying to find your privacy policy, or searching for your fax number?

Nofollow Gives You Some Control Over PageRank Flow

I say "some control," because nofollow isn’t a magic swiss army knife. It’s just a tool. If you think of every link on your site as a valve that pushes some PageRank on to the next page, nofollow simply lets you turn some valves off. This increases the amount of PageRank flowing through the remaining links. By "nofollowing" the links to your overhead pages (except, perhaps, from your sitemap) you move more into your important pages. It’s that simple.

The total amount of PageRank that you have to play with is a function of how much is coming in from the web (mostly), and how many pages you have indexed. You can get more, but no matter how much you get, it still has to be divided up between the pages on your site. Nofollow can’t create more PageRank than you already have, unless you actually get more pages indexed.

Because of the way PageRank flows, your home page will normally have a lot more than your "second tier" pages, which will have a lot more than your "third tier" pages. So although nofollow can help you increase the share of PageRank that flows into each tier, if you want a specific page to get the most possible PageRank, you have to link to it from pages that have some to share – like the home page, many second tier pages, etc.

If The Whole Thing Gives You "Tired Head," You’re Not Alone

Thinking about this stuff wears me out… actually doing the math is even more of a beating.  If you’re like me, you’ll do the simple stuff and then move on. If you really want to get hardcore about it, you’re going to need tools… I’ve built them on my own in the past, and I wouldn’t dare share the kind of spaghetti code that I write with the world.

Fortunately, there is a tool out there that you can use… and it’s free (ain’t the web cool?). Halfdeck (of SEO4Fun) has recently released a free tool called the PageRankBot that will spider your site and map out the distribution of PageRank. He’s labeled it badly as a supplemental results detector, because it’s actually a lot cooler than that. There will be some work involved in installing it, and I am not on board for tech support. With that caveat, it can be all kinds of fun to play with once you get it running.

He even used it to simulate a ’3rd level push’ – sort of (I don’t think he cut the links from the second tier to the home page and left the sitewide links in place), and simply by playing around realized that the "sitewide" links were holding him back from getting more PageRank deeper into the site. It would take you a lot of time to do that without a tool – with it, he sorted out a better PageRank distribution in an afternoon.

To Learn More: Read Chapter 4 of SEO Fast Start – It’s Free

With apologies to our guests, most of the folks reading this have already downloaded SEO Fast Start… so rather than repeat it all here, I’ll refer you to Chapter 4 of SEO Fast Start. The book is free, but if you’re not sure that it’s worth the few minutes it would take for you to go download it, you can read my explanation here.

Discuss…

(PS – I will never buy the idea that Google’s just trying to trick us into revealing our sites as "SEO’d" – I think they can spot the kind of SEO they care about by looking at the anchor text of inbound links)

106 thoughts on “How To Get More Pages Indexed With Nofollow

  1. Pingback: Zachary Fox Blog » Blog Archive » Control Your Page Rank

  2. We use “nofollow” (where applicable) to prevent “duplicate content” issue. We plan our site (links) architecture to avoid pointing to the same page from multiple pages UNLESS we specifically interested to “concentrate” more weight on some pages, e.g. homepage.
    For example, our content management system supports taxonomy where a page may be assigned multiple tags that belong to multiple vocabularies. While this is great from usability point of view – users may find the relevant page using different tags – we have a risk of displaying similar information for the different tags, thus creating “duplicate content” situation.
    I personally was very happy to find a solution for limiting a flow of “link juice” where I didn’t want it to flow using “nofollow” instead of using JavaScript.

    However, the entire “nofollow” issue seems to be somewhat “controversial” – see more here: NoFollow Hurting Google Rankings?

  3. Robots.txt is for controlling robots.

    rel=nofollow is for “I don’t vouch for this external link.”

    I can’t imagine that this “sculpting PageRank with rel=nofollow” feature will last long.

    Google keeps expanding the proprietary uses of rel=nofollow (after submitting it to a standards body — microformats). What if Yahoo and MSN suddenly decide that rel=nofollowing internal links in a site’s template indicates an “over-SEO’d site” and they reduce the quality score of those sites?

    I think that “Sculpting PageRank” on internal links is not a good idea.

    The best thing search engines could do is just ignore rel=nofollow on internal links.

  4. I have a question. As it is the difference between noindex and nofollow? Nofollow clears single pagerank or also it removes them outside the indices from datacenter?

  5. Pingback: (EMP) E-Marketing Performance » : » Team Reading List 9.5.07

  6. Dan, I have just printed out your 100 pages and I will definitely be commenting when I have read it entirely! WE have had our website 6 years and I have self-taught myself on all of it. Always wanting to improve and know more. THanks so very much for all your time and effort and willingness to share!

  7. @ Cay, noindex is used in the robots meta tag – it tells the search engine not to index the page. Nofollow in the robots meta tag tells the spider not to follow any of the links on the page.

    Using “rel=nofollow” on links tells the spider not to follow or count that specific link. Which gives you a great deal of control. Whether you would really need or want that much control depends on the site.

  8. Does Google pass PR through links it finds in an xml sitemap? If so, then nofollow internally may not matter, correct? If you really want more control over PR flow should you eliminate the xml sitemap?

  9. Thank you Dan. If you want the index a page but don’t transfer pagerank, you need another link in other pages of your site for make visible this page?.
    Thank you again.

  10. I couldn’t agree more. I cannot possibly see this going anywhere. Google came up with this no follow attribute to cut down on link spamming mainly in blogs and sites that still have guestbooks.
    Why on earth use no follows on internal links.
    If you are trying to manipulate PR I could see using java script or css. But nofollow??
    That’s just plain goofy and amateurish. And eventually will scream this site is SEO’d! Might as well keyword stuff all of your title tags while you’re at it.

  11. @ Michael, the XML sitemap isn’t going to have any PageRank to start with unless you link to it – although a search engine may use it for discovery purposes. As Jill Whalen and others have pointed out, XML Sitemaps are not a cure for bad structure.

    @Cay, the simplest approach is to link from the home page into a site map section, where you link to overhead pages etc. This gives these pages a little link juice.

    @dann404, not sure who you’re agreeing with… You don’t see any issues with relying on Javascript or CSS? Usability and accessibility don’t matter? You don’t think it’s easy enough to spot SEO just by examining incoming links?

    This isn’t some new idea, it’s been in practice almost as long as nofollow has existed.

  12. Dan,

    I guess I dont get the upside of nofollow, at least as it relates to blogs and blog comments. Id like to hear your take on it. Here’s mine.

    If your blog is full of spam, the responsible blog owner will either turn comments off or use one of the litany of tools to get rid of the junk comments.

    If someone is kind enough to add value to my blog by making a comment (other than “I agree” or “Duuuuude”), I dont see the win-win in telling spiders not to bother following the link to their page.

    Yeah, maybe it skims some page rank or maybe the robot gets lost and never comes back – but my stats dont reflect that.

    Your thoughts?

    I think its just another way to

  13. Dan – Thanks for the detailed explanation. It definitely makes sense, but I’d personally use this only for large/authority sites.

    Smaller sites should be more concerned about getting outside links to the important content than to try to concentrate and improve the limited PageRank their internal pages have.

    We can also argue Google is not evil and all that, but the reality is that if we ‘no-follow’ links to our internal pages, we make it extremely easy for them to identify our SEO’ed sites. Is that a good idea?

  14. @Mark, the use of nofollow on outgoing links to fight blog spam is a whole other issue. I’ve seen what happens when you don’t have nofollow – the volume of comment spam explodes on ya.

    I recently tested the “math test” plug-in, and all it did was reduce the number of comments… apparently a lot of SEOs didn’t pass math. :D

    So I am back to moderating comments manually. I would love to find a plug-in that lets me “trust” individual commenters (like Hamlet Batista) and maybe someone can point me to a good solution.

    @Hamlet… I think there are a lot of easier ways to identify “SEO’d” sites, by doing simple analysis of incoming link text.

    Smaller sites have less to worry about most of the time, but OTOH small sites may have extremely high ratios of overhead:content pages.

    Bloggers have an easier time than anyone, assuming anyone is reading and linking to their posts.

  15. Dan,

    After Rand’s interview with Matt regarding no follow, I researched for a week on forums and blogs and by far you have provided the best explanation. It now makes perfect sense why Google would permit this and I think it provides better search results. For example: A registration page on a small e-commerce site, there’s no reason to pass page rank to this page.

    If you look at it from the user’s perspective. If you did a search for xyz product, and that brings up a registration page then that’s not what google intends. People have to see the product before they create an account to buy it. If putting no follow on registration, privacy, etc… pages gets more of your product catalog indexed then it’s better for ecommerce site owner and better for the users searching for those products.

  16. All this internal ‘nofollowing’ for the purpose of manipulating PageRank is purely for ranking on Google. Does implementing this have any effect (good or bad) on my rankings on Yahoo, Live and Ask?

  17. Sherwin, so far we haven’t seen any meaningful changes with Ask, MSN, or Yahoo on any sites. The last time I checked:

    Ask was ignoring nofollow, probably because they would have to hire some programmers to implement it. :D

    Google & MSN were treating it as “don’t count this link and don’t follow it.”

    Yahoo was reserving the option of using nofollowed links for discovery purposes, but agreed on “don’t count this link.”

  18. I’m working on restructuring my site and don’t want to waste time putting together information and be penalized for what I do. I have a service site, real estate, and I have a question on how you set up a page with lots of lists for who to contact for services, cultural activities,schools and hospitals as examples. Such information is very valuable to people moving who want to know what they are going to lose or add to their life in terms of making a move to another area. Do I need to make such lists as “no follow” or can I provide an introduction and text to make it acceptable. How can I provide this information without being penalized. How much do I need on the page in terms of text to have general lead-in information and add page rank. I apologize for being so wordy. Real estate individuals were heavily hit for real estate reciprocal links with other agents in the last year. I now have no back links and am starting from scratch. As you can tell I’m a newby. Marguerite

  19. Great article!!! Worth the wait. Now if I can just get the PR Bot to work past a bug on my main site I’ll be set.

    I have a question Dan. Suppose you implement some nofollows in your site. What is a good estimate for how long the changes will take to show in the index? Since I’ve completely revised my internal link structuring (using nofollows as a tool- August 1st), Google is just now (as of Sept 2 or so) showing changes in the Webmaster Tools>Internal Links tables. But I still don’t see any kind of significant changes in the SERPS as far as indexed vs. supplemental. It’s like Google works in about 1 wk increments or something. One week they saw my front page, the next week, the second tier pages, then the next week they did nothing, and now they’re finally showing that they “see” the changes. Any thoughts?

    More on the subject, I don’t see why Google would penalize or disable any use of nofollow. It seems to make perfect sense to me, and it’s the best of both worlds. Google can give me and control all the PR they initially assign to my site, that’s fair, but once I have it I should be able to control it internally any way I want. The thought of NOT honoring nofollow is the same concept as spamming within your own site, THAT just seems silly to me. Give me the Page Rank and let me determine how it’s used, thank you. It’s like PR Capitalism vs. PR Communism :-) .

    I’ll stop, I’m a rookie anyhow…thanks for a very nice article Dan.
    Paul

  20. @Marguerite, if you are linking to useful external resources on a resources page, I wouldn’t use nofollow on that. Pass along some link love to them.

    To build more links: If you have some time to watch the link building classes that I’ve made available to subscribers, you will probably get plenty of ideas aside from trading links.

    @Paul, PageRank is calculated and recalculated as they index, but it’s likely to take a few weeks or more for your site to be completely crawled, and for those changes to make their way around the different data centers.

    @Anyone:
    If you believe that using nofollow internally would “subtract trust” from your own pages… or don’t believe Matt Cutts when he says that’s not true… or worry about what other search engines might do:

    Don’t most blogs use nofollow on comments? Don’t most blogs have links from comments to internal pages? Do you really think they’re being penalized by anyone, or ever would be?

    Just asking.

  21. Ask was ignoring nofollow, probably because they would have to hire some programmers to implement it. :D

    Dan – Ask doesn’t need it. There is not a lot of public information about their technology, but it seems that they managed to develop a query dependent link analysis algorithm that is able to scale. The original HITS doesn’t have this capability.

    This means that, on their search engine, a site’s importance/authority is relative to the topic/keywords and not absolute as in PageRank. You can’t buy links on random unrelated sites and expect to rank for any competitive terms on their search engine.

    “trust” individual commenters (like Hamlet Batista)

    Thanks! I like the topics you cover and I like to be part of the conversation ;)

  22. Pingback: Search Engine Land: News About Search Engines & Search Marketing

  23. I just listened to your week 3 audio again for a refresher and you mentioned not using nofollow for the sake of on site searches (37:05). Can you elaborate in light of this recent posting?

    Paul

  24. @Hamlet, I was just taking a cheap shot @ Ask, but yeah, you have to be more selective to spam Ask, and it’s probably easier to just build a good site.

    The PageRank-style logic doesn’t apply much better to MSN or Y in terms of selecting pages to index. I don’t want to say that they go with a fixed crawl depth, but whatever they’re doing, it can “feel” like that.

    @Paul, I just mentioned one example, using a site map page to pass some link love to overhead pages and help them get indexed. But you can see – a year and a half ago, I was pretty much in the same place that a lot of these guys are on nofollow. I had to get “schooled” on it. :D

    Now that I have some good questions, I’m going to post a couple of examples tomorrow, with some diagrams to illustrate. Kind of wanted to do that in this post, but it was turning into a novel already.

  25. Dan,

    If your home page has 2 links to a page such as services and one link to 8 other pages will page rank be distributed 2 parts to the services page and one part each to the other 8 pages? Or will only 1/9 of the page rank pass to the services page even though it has 2 links? If only 1/9 of the page rank passes, then would this be a reason to put no follow on a link with non descriptive anchor text such as Services and let Google follow a link with descriptive anchor text such as Catering Service in Raleigh?

  26. Just a brief anecdote:

    A week later, my little blog’s seeing an increase in the number of pages in the main index (up to 70% from 25% penetration – though 25% was intentional; the rest of the site isn’t that important to me). One of my posts that rolled off the front page for “seo course” (which I used as an experiment to counter Peter De Vanzo’s “domain authority is everything” myth) is now in 6th place. V7N, which I challenged to outrank, is buried somewhere in the third page. Up to 2nd for “free seo course” (used to be around 4th). My “Supplemental Listings” page is back on the front page for “supplemental results” (and I still rank first for “pagerank doesn’t matter”).

    Not a proof until I reverse the effects, especially since Google’s DCs’ been kinda volatile the last few weeks, but as things stand, nofollow sure didn’t hurt my rankings.

  27. From the old days of meta tags to today’s Google Adwords, no one has ever answered the most basic question about any sort of Internet advertising scheme. Through search engines, the only people who have a chance to see your website are those who magically “just happen” to enter the correct search word combination AND if your website “just happens” to appear no farther down than the third page. With print and broadcast advertising driving traffic to your website instead of to an 800 telephone number, those limitations disappear. I have always thought search engine advertising a poor man’s whistle in the dark and I still do.

  28. @James, as far as we know, there are no parallel edges on the graph, so those two links would work as one link. I don’t bother playing those kinds of games with anchor text, but some folks do, without any apparent ill effects.

    @Al, I’d rather catch someone who “just happens to be looking for” what I’m offering, than try to convince someone whose experience of “looking at” something else is interrupted by my ad, which may or may not be of interest to them at all.

    That’s not to say that there isn’t a place for print and broadcast advertising, but I’ve managed multi-million-dollar search advertising campaigns that delivered 400+% measurable return on investment, I just marvel at the ignorance of those who can dismiss search so easily.

    If you’re not using search to reach customers, you’re leaving money on the table, Al.

  29. You said it: you’ve managed campaigns for MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR firms. I’m an independent businessman and I have two written communications from Google AdWords that it will cost $10 per click to get my ads on searh pages 1.

    Everybody in the search engine business has all these glowing claims about the past. Nobody answers the basic question about rifle versus shotgun advertising.

    I’m an MBA and former SEC registered financial adviser. I’m neither stupid nor unknowledgeable. I just wonder why nobody answers the question but always says that failure is the website operator’s fault.

    Without market research data that addresses basic questions that every MBA knows by heart, I’m not wasting my time. Those are: what is the market, who are the competitors, what is my market position and what is my target market share? AFTER that, then what does market research data tell out the best way to present the product to the target market?

    The only answers I get are razz-a-ma-tazz, the same lines from meta tag “consultants” years ago are now recited by the Google AdWords consultants today. Nothing has changed including the fact I if I had multi-millions of dollars to spend on advertising, I’d be on radio and TV pointing listeners and viewers to my website instead of to an 800 number.

    Perhaps you’ve noticed the number of multi-million dollar ad campaigns that do exactly that. Perhaps you’ve also noticed that, while Google is telling everyone how great search engine advertising is, they are offering me hundreds of dollars to launch a print and broadcast media advertising campaign.

    Doesn’t anybody see the contradiction between claims and offers?

    This is just plain dumb.

  30. I think the controversy rages coz the guys are giving their last big advantage tip to everyone – so they want to spread some uncertainty in less understanding heads… that’s how I see it.

  31. Dan,

    Here you wrote:

    “@James, as far as we know, there are no parallel edges on the graph, so those two links would work as one link. I don’t bother playing those kinds of games with anchor text, but some folks do, without any apparent ill effects.”

    So two links would work as one link. What if you two links on a page pointing to the page A. Say they have anchor text “keyword1″ and “keyword2″. Does this one of the anchor text is ignored? Or are they both taken into account and that the pagerank is just split between the two?

    So for example, if there are 10 links on the page. Of the 10 links, 2 links is for page A. The two links that points to page A should share 1/9 of the pagerank. Hence one of the two links passes 1/18 of the pagerank?

  32. @Leo, we’re getting into speculation here, but as far as we know, the two links would be combined into one.

    @Al, I’m sorry that you don’t understand search. You shouldn’t spend a dime on it until you understand it a lot better.

  33. I didn’t and won’t spend a dime on search and there is no need to understand it. For only $600 per year, I just bought a page 1 display ad, with link to my website, on the website of the national trade association for my target industry.

    That is called “rifle” advertising: I’m getting my message to the precise audience I want and not to anyone else.

    You’re the high priest of an arcane secular religion, reciting a litany of predictions that come true at a rate no better than can be achieved by chance guessing.

    Conventional, traditional advertising works. And there isn’t a word of techie-nerd mumbo-jumbo in it.

  34. Al, I do plenty of “traditional” advertising too. Ignoring the search channel because you don’t understand it is just ignorant.

    As for the rest of your rant, save me some of whatever you’re smoking, OK?

  35. Look who’s calling who ignorant.

    Like all other practitioners of mystical religious belief systems, whose predictions NEVER come true at rates better than can be achieved by means of chance guessing, you are not a legitimate advertising agency because you never publish independently audited statistics of effectiveness.

    Talk is cheap. INDEPENDENTLY AUDITED results speak for themselves. That’s why businessmen ignore promises and spend money with legitimate ad agencies.

  36. Al, I’m not even an illegitimate advertising agency. I am not for hire. As you seem to have nothing to offer but bizarre insults, I’m going to let that be your final comment here. Just a suggestion, you might want to put some content on the home page of your site.

  37. No, I do not want to put “content” on the home page of my website because it already contains the “content” that matters to my market.

    By “content,” verbal-compulsive technie-nerds mean WORDS. My market is a VISUAL, GRAPHIC market. What matters to them is what things LOOK like, not what things TALK like. My customers sell PICTURES, not WORDS. If the first thing they see from me does not catch their attention, they won’t look farther.

    How do I know that?

    Because I have independently audited statistics that show (a) only 8% of all traffic comes from search engines and (b) of that 8%, 56% never go farther than home page.

    All that matters on my website is the initial graphic arts impression PLUS the tab marked “FRAME SHOPS” who are my customers. Everything else is merely add-on and it is a great problem keeping add-ons as few as possible.

    This is the perfect illustration of what I mean by techie-nerd religion. You and your kind demand that the world use words in order to understand. Believe me, millions of people understand things very well without “help” of words. That’s why my favorite radio station is in Warsaw when I don’t speak Polish.

    You criticize a visual world to cover up the fact that word people, and their verbal-compulsive search engines, are INHERENTLY incapable of communicating with VISUAL people.

    This difference is not restricted to my perceptions. You will note that the most successful visual arts website of recent times, SmugMug.com, obtains nearly all of its website traffic from photography MAGAZINES. The same is true of its new Austrailian competitor, RedBubble.com.

    On balance, supposing that you do this chit-chat thing for some reason related to business, this is the only fact that matters:

    After discourse with you, as the last in a long series of such persons telling me to convert my visual website to a verbal website, I went from you to an advertising agency and spent $600.

    It doesn’t matter if I was completely wrong in doing that. All that matters from a sales revenue perspective is WHY you didn’t get the $600. Let it be my fault (which is always the case when mystical religions fail). It doesn’t matter whether I am right or wrong. All that matters from as selling perspective is WHY YOU DIDN’T GET THE $600.

    I, too, would like this pointless nonsense to end. The bottom line is that I put my money where my mouth is while you put your mouth where your mouth is.

    Surely you can understand how I might conclude that, as to conduct of business, we are fundamentally different and probably irreconcilably so.

    I talk with pictures and money, not with words.

    Best regards and goodbye,

    Al Olmstead

  38. Al Olmstead,

    It good. We need people like you to buy advertising. We provide the seo on our site. Get high rankings and you guys come in and give us money.

    Cheers

  39. Sheesh, what no one anywhere seems to understand is that ‘nofollow’ is good for google. It makes their crawling job faster, it allows them to save money and it tells them which pages you think are most important and which are least important.

    Knowing which pages you think are important can also be set ing your xml sitemaps so why would Google object to anyone using ‘nofollow’ to make their job eaier.

    Using ‘nofollow’ helps google make money by providing more relevant results. It helps you by moving PR to what you consider the most relevant pages. It’s a win/win. There is no surfer benefit from ‘nofollow’, with the exception of better search results.

    I think the geniuses at Google were smart enough to figure out how it would be used by webmasters before they released it and how much it would benefit SE themselves.

  40. Al Omstead

    Maybe Dan goes too much technical sometimes, but he is very professional.

    He is teaching us how to get organic rankings and he is assumming that the student already is profitable with PPC campaigns and now this student want to increase his ROI by getting free traffic.

    Search engine marketing disects the world in a unique way, as TV advertising does, or email marketing, or any form of publicity. With search marketing you get to the people that know that they have a problem and search for a solution, you will never get to people that doesn’t know that a solution exists. To get to the later, interruption advertising is needed, not search marketing. For example, trying to create a new market with search engines probably will be a total failure, because nobody is searching for what you need to be searched.

    In other words, search marketing plays with the “existing demand” while interruption marketing plays no only with the existing demand but also could create demand as well. The advantage of search marketing is that you can track down which keyword converts and which doesn’t.

    You say that volume of searches is very low, but this depends in the keyword. Some keyphrases are typed thousands times a day by diferent people all over the world, while others could get only 1 click per day. That’s the reason you research before.

    Some keywords have few searches and a lot of competition, others have a lots of searches and not too much competition. That’s the reason you research or die.

    All comes down to ROI. To get decent ROI you test in a small scale, then if that turns profitable, you invest more on PPC, then you get Dan advice and increase your ROI even more getting free listings without dropping the PPC ads, because you don’t want to put all your eggs in one basket.

    About the “visual thing” I doubt a little about it. Maybe the offer was not strong because almost always text outperforms graphics when talking about conversions.

  41. Wow, Wierd Al,
    Nobody is saying there is not a place for traditional advertising. But just like traditional advertising, if you want to play in the internet game, you need to pay attention to what is important there. I am one of the 56% of the 8% that clicked immediately off you page since it did not tell me anything to keep me there. Actually some of us “markets” do read words and do use words to judge whether we want to continue into a website or not. Just a blank page does not make me want to go further, even if it had some better colors. This is an “independent audit” of 1.

    Gotta wonder why you spent so much time here since you know all of this information is “techno-nerdie religion speak”. I think what I got from you is your own “religion-speak” (or anti-religion), but uttered from a scattered mindset.

    I can see disagreeing with someone on thier blog, but gotta wonder about the energy ya put into it.

    Thanks for the great info Dan. Hopefully I can read your book, make an independent assessment of how it works for the world around me (or not) and use what I think makes sense, and maybe even disagree a little, without slamming you for providing free advice.

    Shheesh
    Bob

  42. @Andres, I make no assumptions about where folks are with PPC – the next free book in the series is PPC Fast Start, which is in the works now that this site is finally working the way I want it to.

    @Bob, one of the key ideas with the Fast Start method is that you can replace any part of the process with your own. The framework is for all SEOs, the beginner’s approach embedded in the book is for you to use or modify as you see fit.

  43. The statistics I cited come from an independent study that you can find by searching for “search engine effectiveness”. The study concluded that 56% of the 8% left after viewing page 1 because they had got there by mistake and discovered that the site was not what they were looking for.

    At issue is the fact that, unlike the conventional advertising industry, no one audits search engine claims. The only independent study available proves to a scientific standard of accuracy (96%) that a business cannot be built upon search engines alone.

    Publishing photography, videos and feature films to the retail trades has nothing to do with whether any private person wants to visit my website or not, because I do not sell to private persons. (I delegate individual retail selling to Amazon.com because they know what they’re doing in retail and I don’t.)

    People who pay a couple thousand dollars for a DVD to show off a hunting trip to their friends, or several hundred dollars for a 30-second TV commercial, don’t care what my website looks like to search engines, or for that matter to lookers, which is at least 99% of what any photo website gets from Internet traffic. Most of my critics are professionals who are looking for technical skill. I do free feature films like TODAY IN SPACE and MICKEY BUCK largely to demonstrate that skill.

    The job of display advertising that I purchase is to make sure that those who do visit my website already know what they will find there. Whether or not that advertising does that job waits to be proved by a combination of referrer and page visitation statistics.

    Whatever the result turns out to be, it can’t be worse than 56% disconnects.

    Finally, I did my own test of search engine effectiveness a couple of years ago. I set up a test website called StyleSheets.biz and paid a so-called search engine professional to include all the magic words he wanted. I chose that test name because it is a cross-industry standard term. There’s nothing else to call them but style sheets. Anybody from either the Internet or paper publishing industry looking for that sort of assistance will use that term somewhere in the search.

    At the same time that the professional was doing his thing, I bought referral links at established websites already dealing with style sheet topics.

    In excess of 95% of all referrals came from web site links, not from (in those days multiple) search engines.

    The bottom line is that I don’t want to become a technical specialist in any form of advertising. I hire self-described experts to do that for me.

    Then I audit their results and, if those results don’t work, then the experts are history.

    All I ask anyone to do is to call his shots any way he likes and then make them. I think that the main difference between me and many readers here is that I’m the one who can truly say, “been there, done that.”

    Someone, somewhere, must start delivering on promises.

  44. Sheesh, Al, the first thing I’d say is learn SEO. The second thing I’d say is never, ever trust any stats but your own. Lol, rememeber Enron. who audits the auditors.

    It’s fairly simple to find out what people are searching for and then give it to them.

    BTW, print ads aren’t even as good as you say. 100% of people who buy Enquirer don’t buy the products advertised. Lol, prob less than 1% so by your standards print advertising sucks too.

    The stats you quote mean nothing because it’s an average. Plus it doesn’t take int account website differences. Lol, there are sites I hit the back button before the page is even fully loaded. Fact is some webmasters are stupid just as some advertisers are stupid.

    Heh, I’ve had sites where 99% of visitors clicked thru to the second page. I’ve had membership sites that converted 1/50 and on the same site 95% renewed for at least 6 months before moving on.

    You can get targeted traffic from SE, for what people are searching for and you can make sales to those people. It’s not Voodoo or even rocket science. Just doing your homework before you ever make a site or page.

    Thank God for people like you who don’t believe it. You make it much easier for people like me to get free traffic and make money.

    MOF, I wish everyone was like you, then I could make a ton more money. Thanks for doing it your way, I really do appreciate it. Keep up the good work.

  45. Dan: The report I referred to can be obtained from two sources:
    http://www.searchengineworkshops.com/

    my ftp site: ftp://www.NewRiverFilms.com
    username and password are the same: public-ftp

    Terry: Impugning the integrity of others without examining the methods underlying their work (which is where Enron style fraudulent results are rigged) is just another way to say “Don’t bother me with facts.”

    Also, you may note that I said that this study by others merely confirmed my own test website results at StyleSheets.biz. I didn’t do the SEO work, I paid a professional to do it so that he couldn’t blame his results on me.

    Again, all I ask of any self-styled expert is that he produce results at rates significantly better than can be achieved by means of chance guessing. That is the only standard by which mystical religions can be distinguished from true knowledge.

  46. By the way:

    I love to get proved wrong when I win anyway because I find a new way to make money. So:

    I will provide indefinite free website hosting to anyone, including Dan, who will set up a double-blind-type test of search engine effectiveness on any topic whatsoever. The only requirement is that a second source of link leads must be used in addition to search engines.

    My server in Canada has an automatic traffic analyzer. I can’t rig the results of the test even if I wanted to, which I don’t.

  47. Lol, to paraphrase Maureen Dowd. AlWorld, Enter at your own risk.

    No dude, it’s another way to say, Who audits the auditors? Who guards against the guards, who polices the police? Just because an auditor says it, doesn’t make it true.

    There are a ton of ways to make money on the net. Your method works for you. Dan’s works for him and mine works for me. So what?

    Hey, if you want a challenge, I challenge you to make a one visible word, web page and then get it ranked in the top 30 for the words ‘poor al’. You, personally, not your experts. If YOU can’t do that then send YOUR experts in as they might begin to understand what’s being talked about here.

    I said top 30 because you’re an amateur. If you were a pro or one of your experts I’d have said top 5.

    Sorry al, it ain’t about who’s right or wrong, it ain’t about anything but money and money’s just a way to keep score after basic needs are met. Free enterprise is a wonderful thing.

    Wow, I’m impressed. Free website hosting. Golly, I’ll sure bust my butt for that. Of course I don’t know what I’d do with my 3 servers I’ve had since 1997 or my other varied accounts around the world.

    I don’t need auditors to tell me what works. I don’t need experts to tell me how to do it and I sure don’t base my decisions about what works or doesn’t work on any stats but my own.

    Here’s something a smart guy like you should know. All religions are mystical.

    Oh well, I’ve wasted enough of my time. Time to go lay in the sun and do something constructive.

  48. As Dan pointed out, this “dynamic linking” approach, using the nofollow attribute to channel PR, has been around for a while.

    Whenever I come across something like this; an ambiguous/controversial SEO technique;
    my approach is simply to test it, and find out first hand if it is worth implementing or not.

    So here’s my 5 cents worth:

    1. Problem:
    Check your stats. Which pages are most popular?
    In many cases you will discover that quite a few searchers land on these “overhead” pages Dan mentioned. But what’s the use of having a relevant search for your business land on your contact or legal page? You can’t “sell” to them from these pages… so you’ll probably loose their attention right then and there. Lost opportunity.
    Why are these pages so popular? Because, judging from how you have structured your website, these “overhead” pages are perceived to be very important. Why else would you link to them from every page? Passing value with every link…

    2. Possible Solution:
    By adding the nofollow attribute to certain internal links on your main pages, YOU CLARIFY WHICH PAGES ARE MORE VALUABLE/RELEVANT THAN OTHERS, TO YOUR BUSINESS… TO YOUR POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS… AND TO THE SE’s. Your relevant services/product info subpages, will receive more “attention” from the SE crawlers, and you can strenghten this effect, by “fine tuning” your xml sitemaps “priority”, “changefreq” etc. to reflect the value YOU give each page within your site structure.

    3. Result:
    More of your deeper services/product pages will be indexed, creating a broader “net” for you to capture relevant searches.

    4. Conclusion:
    Does it work? If done properly, yes.
    Aren’t you trying to “game” the SE’s so isn’t it against their guidelines?
    NO and NO. You are helping the SE’s to determine the theme/value/relevance of whatever your website has to offer, so you are helping them serve up more relevant search results. Bare in mind though that not every SE treats the nofollow attribute the same way, and that this approach is mainly helpful for your site’s visibility in Google…

    To Dan:
    Thanks very much for the great free guide Dan. I’ve read your previous work and even though I’ve been doing SEO for a few years now, it is such a fast-paced industry, that trying to keep up and separate the wheat from the chaff can be very time consuming. No one in their right mind can claim to “know it al”… Oops, sorry I mean “know it all” ;-)

  49. Great Post Radzster. Very well stated.

    Taken to the extreme all SEO could be called gaming the search engines in one way or another, but doing things that provide more relevant results should be the end game that search engines and websites strive to reach. Who really wants to land on a site’s policy page first?

    I think that fact that Matt Citts mentioned the use of nofollow as a tool should let us all know it is ok to use and not seen as gaming. Who knows down the road a year or two – but that’s the SEO.

    Bob

  50. @Radzster – thank you! I definitely don’t know it all, but I’m working on it. Maybe I’m not creative enough, but I haven’t really found any way to “abuse” this.

    @Bob, Google is always working on improvements – I’m sure that one of their goals would be to make this type of thing unnecessary and irrelevant.

    (Al would like everyone to read his latest rant, but he’s on pre-moderation now. I think I can roughly summarize his position as “if you won’t use your valuable time humoring me that proves I’m right.”)

  51. @Bob – Thanks! ;-) Yeah… sadly SEO is all too often perceived as “gaming” or “trickery”. I like to see it as a Quality Assurance / Best Practices approach, and an integral part of any website development project. It’s just a case of dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s (white hat, that is). SE’s have such a huge impact on a user’s interaction with the www today, that ignoring the potential SEO has to offer, can be very costly… not to mention, very unwise.

    @Dan – No worries! You’re welcome. I read your latest SEO Fast Start in one go yesterday! Good stuff, and definitely some things there I had not considered before… Please keep it coming! ;-)

  52. Pingback: Is it safe to “nofollow” internal pages? | On-Page SEO | SEO Handholding.com

  53. What a great tool you mentioned in this article, Dan!

    This is not to say that there is nothing else in the article – it is highly usefull for me, and I keep implementing its ideas ever since I read it a week and a half back. I just sort of got used to the fact I’m getting highest quality content on this site :) But this soft – I’m in love with supplemental results detector! I believe everybody with a site bigger than a dozen pages needs that tool badly.

    I’m playing with it for the second week in the row, and I still find the things I can clean up or improve on the site (mine is the pretty big one). Thanks a million to Halfdeck for writing the tool, and for you for mentioning it here – I would never probably found it on my own.

    Misha

  54. Hi Dan, is there a reason you are using @ in front of person’s name e.g. @Bob. If I am guessing right, this maybe to prevent this name from indexing? If not, is there a way to prevent a portion of content from being indexed at all. E.g. in case if i had some irrelevant data on a particular page which I don’t want to expose to a crawler. Thanks.

  55. @Misha – I was just getting ready to hire someone to build me a better version of my old PageRank spider, when that was released. :D

    @Sergey – I often end up replying to several folks in one comment, or replying to a comment a few posts back. @ is just a convenient shorthand for “at” or “to.”

  56. i saw many comments about “index,nofollow” subject.
    How about “noindex,follow” and how can it help ranking content? I have heard about so called “bumper pages” with some links to follow, but not for indexing really. Can this help to boost ranking in your opinion?

  57. Pingback: September ‘07: Best Search/Marketing Posts » Small Business SEM

  58. Pingback: Internal Linking 101 | DaveShap.com

  59. I’ll make you a better offer that won’t waste any of my time playing stupid games with you.

    One of my friends’ web sites does about $1 million per year in sales through search marketing, at a marketing cost of just under 12% of sales. If you join their affiliate program, they pay you 15% of sales, so whatever you do that’s superior to SEM, you’ll have a nice tidy margin.

    Since you’ll naturally be able to drive at least a million a year in sales with your superior methods, and these superior methods will cost less than 12% of sales… let’s see… 1,000,000 x 3% = $30,000 if you only match what we get from search.

    Worth a lot more than lifetime web hosting, don’t you think? Let me know. :D

  60. Hi Dan,

    Someone recently used proxy hacking to remove my site from Google’s index. I am actively trying to get Google to fix this issue as well as implement a fix. I just wanted to say God Bless you for posting this post! Otherwise I would be dead in the water.

  61. Well, the thing is that Google is consistantly changing their algorithms, little by little. This means that what nofollow did a year ago, it probably does differently this year. Or, should we say, the way in which Googlebot read nofollow a year ago is certainly different now.
    Google is obviously wanting to see nofollow become a useful tool for webmasters. This is probably their goal. So, I would say, that using it is probably advantageous. Google is going to try and make sure it is.

  62. Pingback: Don’t Even Start Link Building Until You…

  63. When my boss assigned me to blogging some time ago we all thought that with the onset of NO FOLLOW attributes, it will be really difficult to get the most appropriate linkback juice.

    It used to be that the NoFollow link attribute (rel=”nofollow”) was originally created to block search engines from following links in blog comments, due to the amount of blog comment spamming. Nowadays, NoFollow has been adopted beyond blog comments. Wikipedia is now using NoFollow for external links and Google recommends that paid links use a NoFollow attribute.

    But thanks to your post. With your post it’s like we have been revived. Your post gave us true hopes in the midst of published materials saying that the NOFOLLOW attribute is nothing but a failure.

    By the way, have you heard about the WP plugin called NOFOLLOW Free? Basically, NoFollow Free removes the “nofollow” attribute from your wordpress blog’s comments (precisely from the author’s links) and/or from the comments text links.

  64. Dear Custom Pet Portraits,

    There are a lot of reasons why I’m not using plugins like that. Mainly, it’s already enough work to moderate comments, without an open invitation.

    When you say your boss assigned you to “blogging,” does that mean you actually write a blog?

  65. Pingback: PageRank sculpting - Siloing and more - Joost de Valk's SEO Blog

  66. Dan just wondering…Do you still feel as strongly as you did before on PR Sculpting, especially internal PR Sculpting?

  67. Jaan, if by "as strongly as before" you mean "it’s helpful in some situations," yes. I still feel that strongly.

    A simple idea, a good idea, but now being hyped to death. I don’t think it’s necessary for every site, and it’s often more of a short term solution than a long term solution.

    I don’t buy Mikkel’s argument that it’s going to get abused to the point where it becomes spam… that’s giving the idea far too much credit IMO. The most you can do, structurally, within a site, is elevate a sub page to "second tier" by linking to it from every page… and that’s not exactly earth shattering.

    There’s nothing you can do to your structure with nofollow that you couldn’t do without it, except that nofollow allows you to preserve some usability features that otherwise conflict with SEO to an extent. I think that’s probably why the search engines aren’t complaining about it.

    Now that Google *appears* committed to deeper crawling with full indexing, stuff like this will become useful in fewer situations.

    I don’t buy Rand’s "test" either, BTW.

  68. No problem… please post a link here too.

    The main reason why I included this stuff in the book is because the typical website doesn’t have enough PR coming in to get all of their pages indexed.

    If you have 300 pages but only enough link juice to get 100 of them indexed, you’d want to be able to influence which pages get indexed. If you can sculpt a bit and get 120-150 indexed instead, that’s even better.

    It doesn’t relieve you of the need to promote your business and build a reputation with inbound links.

  69. Hello Dan Thies. I’m doing your FastStart free training and have a question, and didn’t where to put it, so I’ll try here. Thanks for a very useful training, by the way.

    1: Is it better to setup a blank “coming soon”-page instead of just park the domain?
    I have some domains that will get my full attention in 6 months or 1 year. If I just upload a coming-soon site it will be easier to rank when the site are designed, because it has passed Google Sandbox. But the disadvantage might be a lower trust from G when the site was empty first year? Or is it only good to do that? Any ideas, links on the subject?

    Thanks,
    Mats.

  70. Mats, welcome!

    Forget about the search engines for a minute, and just think about what will happen with people.

    1) A domain parking page is ugly, and says “nothing is here, and there will probably never be anything here.”
    2) A blank page is useless, but a “coming soon” page with a brief description of what’s coming would be better.
    3) A coming soon page, with a description, and an opt-in list for the site launch announcement is even better.
    4) A coming soon page with a description and an “ask campaign” to get questions and feedback would be better still.

    In terms of search engines’ reactions, it’s anyone’s guess, but I’d bet on a page with real unique content being better than a blank page, and better than a parking page.

    Dan

  71. Thanks for that detailed answer Dan!

    I’ve been off-line for a year or so because I was soo in-love.
    Now I’m on-line because we are off-love :-)

    About the new fashion with non-extensions in sites, like:
    /internal-nofollow-help
    instead of: /internal-nofollow-help.HTML:

    I create and save files as html as usual in Dreamweaver and upload them without .html extension? Do I need to read more about this phenomenom: wikipedia?

    Is there a wordpress plugin that removes the .html?
    Or do you modify the .htaccess every day?

    Thanks,
    Mats.

  72. WordPress doesn’t publish static files as far as I know, Mats.

    When I write a post, I define a “slug” that becomes the tail end of the URL (e.g. internal-nofollow-help), and WordPress takes care of the rest. If I don’t give the post a custom slug, it makes one out of the post title.

    Maybe there’s some special plug-in that does this, I don’t know. I just bought the Semiologic package because it already had a bunch of stuff baked in that I didn’t want to hunt down and install.

  73. Pingback: Social Marketing with Digg - Just What is a Digg User -Email Delivery, Social Marketing, Avoiding Spam Filters and RSS Marketing Tools

  74. The official claim is that links with the rel=nofollow attribute do not influence the search engine rankings of the target page. In addition to Google, Yahoo and MSN also support the rel=nofollow attribute.

    i think it helps indexing…

  75. Pingback: Optimise Your Contact Page, Don’t Nofollow It - Hobo SEO UK

  76. “Nofollow” shall be good to control the flow of pagerank, keeping it inside your own domain other than leaking out, and flowing to the more important pages other than less important
    pages. Thanks for sharing your point.

  77. Sorry for not responding to your question right away. What I meant about blogging is I was assigned to write blog posts for the purpose of creating backlinks, to write blog comments where I am curious about the role played by relevance in terms of theme and content, and to create blogs where I can do everything.

  78. PageRankBot is very interesting. I downloaded it and it was trying to analyze a domain. After getting 2k results and running for a few hours, no results are displayed and it’s status remains “Loading DC…”

    I stopped and restarted the program but it’s not working! Can anyone help?

  79. Hello again Dan.
    It has been 9 months since my last questions.
    Thanks for the reminder of Stomping The Search Engines 2 that I bought.
    Question:
    I have a theory that is good for the surfers, search engines and for me to improve ranking: If I have the domain: MySuperDuperContactLenses.com and have that text in the anchor text of the link, I will also get ranked for “super duper” that I don’t want. If I do a “print screen” of that link, make a .jpg picture of that link, insert that picture in the text, and put the “alt tag” ‘contact lenses’, I will rank for ‘contact lenses’, and the surfers will see the whole URL. So my question is: Will Google rank a linked picture with alt tag the same way as Google treat an ordinary text link?

    Question 2: I builded many version 1 sites 9 months ago in format index.html. Now when I update them to version 2 I will use index.php instead. Should I do a “Redirect 301 /index.html http://www.domain.com/index.php” in the .htaccess?
    And then in a month do the final redirect: “Redirect 301 /index.php http://www.domain.com/“?

    Or I don’t have to do this redirects because google index http://www.domain.com/ and not http://www.domain.com/index.html, so Google doesn’t care if it’s index.html or index.php
    I have learned the most stuff online by trial and error that’s why I ask a Pro like you.
    I don’t wanna lose the time online because the sites have grown thru the Google Sandbox. (Sorry for painting my thoughts in soo many words, but english is not my first language :-D

    Mats.

  80. Mats,

    1) Alt text on an image link will do nothing whatsoever to help you get ranked. So there is no need to come up with a scheme like that.

    2) Do the redirects all at once. As long as you aren’t linking to /index.html or /index.php inside the site, and you have the redirects in place, you should be in great shape.

  81. Hi Dan,

    I need to get more of my pages indexed in Google.
    So I have a site that has around 200 pages and 140 of them are indexed in Google. My site is siloed using nofolow and has many top 10 results.

    I’ve been adding articles and the indexing of my pages is not increasing, it is decreasing.

    Would linking to my new pages from the homepage with nofollow help to get them indexed.

    From my understanding nofollow stops the passage of pagerank from one page to another but the page still gets spidered or indexed.

  82. Assuming said site is getting traffic from all of those nofollow links, real links from that traffic should naturally follow. Since most social networking sites are all about the flavor of the day those links will probably fade into oblivion anyway a few days down the road, never to be seen again.

  83. I don’t get nofollow it has me confused.

    I tested it by making all my links that point to realted conenent nofollow and thre results were that those pages gained PR that they didn’t have before so.. maybe nofollow doesn’t do anything unless it’s an external link?

    Im looking forward to some imput on this.

  84. This is a great article. No-follow is a great way to sort of trick the search engines. It’s a key component in long-term success of a website or blog and can eventually result in large amounts of concentrated traffic and also huge profits. One person who really uses no-follow perfectly is Jason Katzenback from Johncow.com You can find some link building information of mine at http://www.designdevmag.com

  85. I wanted to know whether google index links from nofollow tags sites/blogs too?

    Suppose we leave blog comment at nofollow taged site, is it likely to get indexed by google?

  86. Thanks for the advice but I think nofollow is better. One can add do-follow only to those which he need. This will help both Google and the Website owner

    Don’t matter what Cutts says:p

  87. To this date, March 26th, 2010 the nofollow PageRank flow has been changed. Google made it so that instead of manipulating the flow of PageRank through a website, that it actually dissipates or goes away, gone, zilch, nothing, nada. So if you have structured your site in such a way I highly recommend changing it so keep the PageRank in your site. This was commented by Matt Cutts a highly respected employee of Google. You can find his blog here: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/

  88. dang, that was an enjoyable read.. jammed that bad boy with value thanks Dan. People should see this so I will share it, another tip is inside linking from page to page within your website *couch Blog :D You have complete control of it so you can get your “vote” for whatever keyword you want ;D
    all the best.
    Vincent Cameron

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>