Our company is mentioned on some high-traffic, authoritative sites and some of our products are linked as well. If we link to those pages, does it affect our SEO? How can we take advantage of those mentions?
-
I heard that if you link to another site, when Google indexes your site, they crawl that page that is referenced. By whatever metrics they use, if that site has your name or a link to your site, Google would rank it higher.
I am not sure how true that is, but what value does another site mentioned our site have on our SEO?
-
Thank you both for your answers.
I am still not sure, so let me add a little context: the NYTimes mentions and links to my company. In our blog we could reference the article and the point that is made could be valuable to our visitors. Is there a value to linking to that page? The idea of rel="nofollow" tells me there is, but I am not sure.
Ultimately, I agree. Our focus should be value to our customers. But, I would be remiss to not try and take advantage of such a valuable mention.
Thank you again!
-
Excellent response and advice. My only concern was Jonathon has the impression he "should" link to the pages linking to him by how I read his title.
So my advice based on that would be absolutely no as a reaction to gaining the link, then to stand back, consider and follow your advice.
-
Hi Jonathon, Excellent question! I expect you'll get two or three opinions on this. Here's mine, but keep in mind, depending on your goals, it may or may not be the right thing for you.
Don't be a link hog.
What do I mean by that?
I mean, don't be so tight with your concern about leaking link juice (God I hate that term!) out of your pages by linking to another site. Instead, think about it this way:
Is linking to this other resource or site helpful to my readers/site visitors? Does the fact that you are linking to a valuable resource enhance the value of your content/page and end up making you even more authoritative than you would have seemed without it?
If the answer to that is "yes!" Than, by all means, link to that other page or resource and be polite and respectful and for heaven's sake make it a "followed" link.
On the other hand, are you linking to the other page simply as a conversational, maybe even a one-off mention, like a link to a manufacturer from an eCommerce site? or worse, is someone paying you for a link back to them? Or perhaps it's a link contained in a comment on one of your posts.....Sure, go ahead and link if you want to, but use the rel="nofollow" attribute for those types of links.
It's certainly a judgement call, but I try to look at things this way, if I thought highly enough of a resource to mention it or include it for my visitors/readers, then I probably should link with a followed link. Just my two cents! Hope that helps
Dana
-
I think you mean the other way round.
If you have a new site and you get a link from an authority site the chances are that site page might (and it is a might) get crawled more often, which then leads Google back to your site and stands you in good stead for Google to crawl and index your site. Other methods include submitting your sitemap to Webmaster Tools.
If good quality sites are linking to yours then that's great as it's telling Google your site is of value and will help with your rankings. You do not want to link back to those pages, you want to go out and find more sites to link to you.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Increase of non-relevant back-links drop page ranking?
Hi community, Let's say there is a page with 50 back-links where 40 are non-relevant back-links and only 10 are relevant in-terms of content around the link, etc....Will these non-relevant back-links impact the ranking of the page by diluting the back-link profile? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Can 'Jump link'/'Anchor tag' urls rank in Google for keywords?
E.g. www.website.com/page/#keyword-anchor-text Where the part after the # is a section of the page you can jump to, and the title of that section is a secondary keyword you want the page to rank for?
Algorithm Updates | | rwat0 -
Links to category pages unnatural?
If people are linking to your site, it would seem natural that the vast majority of those links would point to the homepage, product page, or a article/content page. Let's say you have 100 links pointing to your site, and 40 of them are pointing to category pages. Would this seem unnatural? Does Google or other search engines have a way of determining this as a factor in ascertaining whether the links are natural or not? Is there a rule of thumb when it comes to the pages that are linked to on your site?
Algorithm Updates | | inhouseseo0 -
Any benefit to splitting up links from one company to diff pages?
We are the presenting sponsor for this big event in our area (Chasco Fiesta). As part of being their sponsor, their website has linked to us in five different places on their site. But it's all to our homepage. Would there be any benefit to having them link to other pages on our site instead of just our homepage (assuming the other pages are a reasonable expectation for the user, of course)? Thanks, Ruben
Algorithm Updates | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
SEO having different effects for different sites
Hi, I hope this isn't a dumb question, but I was asked by a local company to have a look at their website and make any suggestions on how to strengthen and improve their rankings. After time spent researching their competitors, and analysing their own website I was able to determine that they are actually in a good position. The have a well structured site that follows the basic search rules, they add new relevant content regularly and are working on their social strategy. Most of their pages are rated A within Moz, and they spend a lot of time tweaking the site. When I presented this to them, they asked why there are sites that rank above them that don't seem to take as much care over their website. For example, one of their main competitors doesn't engage in any social networking, and rarely adds content to their site. I was just wondering if anyone could shed any light on why this happens? I appreciate there's probably no simple answer, but it would be great to hear some different input. Many thanks
Algorithm Updates | | dantemple880 -
Should I use canonical tags on my site?
I'm trying to keep this a generic example, so apologies if this is too vague. On my main website, we've always had a duplicate content issue. The main focus of our site is breaking down to specific, brick and mortar locations. We have to duplicate the description of product/service for every geographic location (this is a legal requirement). So for example, you might have the parent "product/service" page targeting the term, and then 100's of sub pages with "product/service San Francisco", "product/service Austin", etc. These pages have identical content except for the geographic location is dynamically swapped out. There is also additional useful content like google map of area, local resources, etc. As I said this was always seen as an SEO issue, specifically you could see in the way that googlebot would crawl pages and how pagerank flowed through the site that having 100's of pages with identical copy and just swapping out the geographic location wasn't seen as good content, however we still always received traffic and conversions for the long tail geographic terms so we left it. Las year, with Panda, we noticed a drop in traffic and thought it was due to this duplicate issue so I added canonical tags to all our geographic specific product/service pages that pointed back to the parent page, that seemed to be received well by google and traffic was back to normal in short order. However, recently what I notice a LOT in our SERP pages is if I type in a geographic specific term, i.e. "product/service san francisco", our deep page with the canonical tag is what google is ranking. Google inserts its own title tag on the SERP page and leaves the description blank as it doesn't index the page due to the canonical tag on the page. Essentially what I think it is rewarding is the site architecture which organizes the content to the specific geo in the URL: site.com/service/location/san-francisco. Other than that there is no reason for it to rank that page. Sorry if this is lengthy, thanks for reading all of that! Essentially my question is, should I keep the canonical tags on the site or take them off since Google insists on ranking the page? If I am ranking already then the potential upside to doing that is ranking higher (we're usually in the 3-6 spot on the result page) and also higher CTR because we can get a description back on our resulting page. The counter argument is I'm already ranking so leave it and focus on other things. Appreciate your thoughts on this!
Algorithm Updates | | edu-SEO0 -
Site-wide Footer Link on Client/Friend Website - Dangerous?
Hi Guys, I've got a friend / client / business associate who's website I helped develop. It's a three letter dot-com, so good trust, and an eCommerce site, so lot's of pages. When I launched my new site about 6 weeks ago I put "Official IT Partner of MySite.com" in the footer. No keywords in the anchor text, just the domain URL... There are no other external links like that on the site whatsoever, and I haven't been hit by Penguin. I'm ranking well for local targeted keywords a few weeks after launch, and traffic continues to increase... I am worried that Google will see this is unnatural, but I've received no warning or experienced any decline in rankings. There's about 2800 pages linking from the site to my site, all in the footer of course. Would it be better to remove the link from the footer and add it just to the home page and a couple of other high authority pages, or should I leave it be. It's not "unnatural", I am affiliated with the site and work in partnership with the site, but it does fit that profile. I'm thinking about removing the footer link and adding a small graphic on the home page of the linking site which links to my root domain, with a couple of broad keyword anchored links in a description underneath that also link to relevant pages on my site... What do you think? 2800 links w/ my URL as anchor text from high Domain Authority / Low Page Authority pages (the homepage and a few other pages have decent authority) to my root domain OR Three different links from one High DA/ High PA homepage (one image alt, two anchored w/ broad keywords) to three different pages on my site. Again, there are no other site-wide external links on the domain, and I'm pretty sure I escaped the Penguin. Looking forward to hearing the different points of view. Thanks, Anthony
Algorithm Updates | | Anthony_NorthSEO2