23 replies to this topic

[1dmf]

Hi,

I have been approached to add a paid link advert on our site, having checked it out, the site is decent and genuine, and related, but not direct competition and so feel there is no problem adding this link.

However, what's the going rate? What are link/advert charges based on?

prominance / position / hits to page per week?

Any guidance as to a fair price is appreciated, I've put the link up already so you can view it [removed] , you can't miss the advert at the top!

What would you charge for this? they want the advert to run for 3 months.

Cheers,
1DMF.

[Michael Martinez]

You do understand that selling a link could strip your site forever of its ability to confer PageRank and anchor text once it's detected, right? How much is that worth to you? That is what should determine the price you charge.

[1dmf]

Sorry, since when have I not been allowed to sell advertising on my site using a rel='nofollow' ?

I'm selling advertising space not PageRank? If Google thinks it can tell people they cannot advertise on their own site anymore, it's time Google went to hell!

Anyways, the enquiry has gone dead, because our Directors wanted too much money and a reciprical link.

I've yet to be approached by a proper web master requesting a decent link to a decent site, or one willing to pay the going rate for premium advertising space... Dunno how you guys managed it to be honest.

[PatrickGer]

Whats google's stance on someone selling a link using a nofollow-tag, though? Is 1dmf actually right about this? I can see that doing so would scream "Hello Google, Im knowledgeable about SEO"...but if someone chooses to sell a link for the traffic and uses the nofollow-tag does G mind?

[1dmf]

If G! thinks it can tell people they can't sell advertising space on their website, they are having a laugh.

G! bitch slaped chow & co for selling PR and told everyone they should use rel='nofollow' , I'm happy to abide by guidelines, but no company should be dictated to by G! as per how they run their own company and manage their advertising on THEIR website.

It may be G! PR but it's MY website!

but if someone chooses to sell a link for the traffic and uses the nofollow-tag does G mind?

I understood it's what G! expects you to do, tell them not to ad PR juice to the link because it is an advert.

Either way, there is no link, so it's not an issue, but thanks for the concern Jill.

Surely G! has bigger fish to fry judging by the amount of in the engine these days, than to penalise someone for trying to do the right thing?

[Jill]

Sorry, since when have I not been allowed to sell advertising on my site using a rel='nofollow' ?

You phrased it as selling a link, not selling advertising, which is why you got the responses that you did.

Whats google's stance on someone selling a link using a nofollow-tag, though?

It's fine. It won't count towards PageRank and that's all Google care's about.

If G! thinks it can tell people they can't sell advertising space on their website, they are having a laugh.

They can't, and they don't. They are advertisers themselves and would be in big trouble if they tried to stop others from allowing ads on their sites.

They simply don't want people trying to subvert their link popularity algorithm by buying links disguised as editorial votes.

[1dmf]

Thanks Jill, that's what I thought.

I guess terming it 'selling a link' was my downfall, but it really is arguing over semantics.

There are very few adverts on peoples websites that don't link somewhere.

So have they sold a link or not?

Is it an advert if it's an image, but a link if it is text?

[Sarah]

In my mind "selling a link" or "buying a link" is getting an anchor optimised link from a site targeting unrelated content.

What you sold was advertising space, but advertising can be a text (advertorial) or image (display).

[1dmf]

Thanks Sarah, i guess the only difference between them then is 'Motive'

[Jill]

It is and it isn't. Google doesn't care if you buy or sell links or advertising. They just want to be able to distinguish which ones fall into those categories so that they don't inadvertently count them in their link popularity algorithms.

So as long as they're clearly marked as sponsored or ads, you're not doing anything wrong or have anything to worry about.

[1dmf]

, glad we got that one cleared up. rel="nofollow" on all links / adverts unless you are 'voting' for the site and they haven't paid you... but having said that , G! clearly can't work out which is which because of the crap in their results hey Jill

[rustybrick]

You mean selling links is bad?

[madams]

I had some paid links on my site and added the no-follow

The company who paid for the links got on to me and told me to remove the no-follow, as a natural link was what they paid for.

I left the links for 1 year, as per the agreement, they took them off.

I believe the links affected my rankings but I cant prove that was the cause.

Go figure...

[1dmf]

as a natural link was what they paid for.

Surely that's a contradiction in terms?

It can't be natural and paid for?

[madams]

Natural as in without the no-follow...

The point is, they where paying for the link juice, I guess to increase their SE position.