Oh Geesh, So You Think You’ll Win TLA?
The other day when I posted my hypothesis on why websites’ pagerank dropped, I left TLA an email asking will they ever put the nofollow tag in their ads so I can continue to use them. Surprisingly they replied like a man under a rock, here’s the transcript of our emails:
ME: “Will you ever consider putting the “nofollow” attribute in your text links so I can continue using TLA? I am worried about Google penalizing me for selling links that pass pagerank and link juice”
TLA: “No, we will not. Nofollow is for comment spam, not for advertisements.”
ME: “How about this:
http://searchengineland.com/071007-173841.php”TLA: “Carl,
Searchengineland is not Google. They are not the authority on the matter.”
ME: “Sure,
here’s google:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/”TLA: “Carl,
Maybe you missed his disclaimer.
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/disclaimer
“This is my personal blog. The views expressed on these pages are mine alone and not those of my employer.”
ME: “Ok, here’s some more:
http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/
answer.py?hl=en&answer=66736″
TLA: “Carl,
That makes Google a bit of a hypocrite now, doesn’t it.”
ME: “Haha. You cracked me up there dude.
I guess you should do your homework now and tell Patrick
what’s happening ;-)”
What were they thinking? I’ve got proof and there’s no way you can clog me up.
At least that man made my day :razz:
Oh btw, I don’t hate TLA. It’s just that if they don’t put the nofollow tag on the ads I’ll stop using their service, but that doesn’t mean I’ll stop using feedvertising and their affiliate!
Bookmark
Related Posts
15 Comments Add yours
October 27, 2007
9:30 am #comment-1
Well, i think that TLA as PR based service are in deep sh*t now, a lot of A-list and smaller bloggers are dropping them fearing of Google’s rage,
if TLA wont change then google will force them to change (or close up)
October 27, 2007
10:59 am #comment-2
Ya, I agree with you not to use them to sell links any more and don’t ever sell links to those that don’t allow you to use nofollow tags.
Carl,
How was your Page Rank doing? Mine rose from PR N/A to a PR4.
October 28, 2007
1:18 am #comment-3
From 4 to 3, no fuss about it though.
October 27, 2007
1:45 pm #comment-4
I hope TLA don’t include no-follow links and let PR remain in their system :twisted: You know, now is the best time for a small budget advertiser like me to take advantage of the Google slaps and advertise low on the big blogs :twisted:
October 28, 2007
1:22 am #comment-5
… and get banned for link buying? :razz:
October 28, 2007
12:26 am #comment-6
Carl, when someone guest blogs in your site, will you nofollow the permanent link to that guest blogger’s site?
Or will be like TLA, except that the payment is not in dollars but in the form of an article?
October 28, 2007
1:21 am #comment-7
Of course not, I don’t put nofollows on posts.
October 29, 2007
7:25 pm #comment-8
No, nor should you. It is fair compensation for someone offering you their time and effort to provide them a clean link back to their website. If you trust their content on your site, then you should trust it on their own site as well.
The problem with the line of bs that Google is trying to get people to buy is that they themselves stated, at the inception of the whole nofollow introduction, is that the attribute was a way to protect you from linking to bad neighborhoods that you couldn’t vouch for, in situations where you had no editorial control. It was a measure to control comment spam, nothing more.
By penalizing people for selling TLA’s, Google is in effect trying to say that webmasters no longer have the ability to choose who they link out to, that the entire internet is populated by people who will link to anyone for a buck. This just isn’t true, and it is in no way, shape, or form Google’s job to make that assertion.
Patrick is dead on in holding his ground on this one.
October 28, 2007
11:39 am #comment-9
Since the link to the guest blogger’s site is a straight or natural link, and since the link is some kind of favor in exchange for the guest post, will Google see the link as a manipulation of pagerank?
For example, if the guest blogger did not make the post, would you still put a straight link to their site?
October 28, 2007
5:13 pm #comment-10
Funny exchange, TLA are losing their customers and their heads too :grin:
October 29, 2007
1:37 pm #comment-11
I had a similar phone chat and email exchange with them. Nowhere in their terms and agreements does it require the nofollow, though they do verbally require it. If you do cancel, be careful. When I told them I needed to cancel they shut down my account and I didn’t get paid for the month of ads shown.
http://www.usefulconcept.com/index.cfm/2007/10/17/Canceling-Text-Link-Ads
October 29, 2007
4:03 pm #comment-12
I was under the impression that TLA applies nofollow on request.
October 30, 2007
7:01 pm #comment-13
I am glad they are standing their ground although it might be detrimental to their bottom line.
And I have been cutting back on the many paid links I had with them for the past 6 months or so. Now I am at zero, but they sent me & my clients an enormous amount of link juice. I am sad to see them go, but there are alternatives… textlinkbrokers dot com (who hides urls)
I hope TLA’s new products can balance off the losses.
And the “google police” better be causing this much turmoil with sites that actually pollute the search results, and spammers, and hackers and botnets….
they are like Bush on a wild goose chase… retards
November 1, 2007
6:48 pm #comment-14
Under the “Google Police” concept, we are trusting a large corporation to provide a neutral internet search experience. The problem is they have a vested interest, because they are advertisers in ensuring that they rules are skewed in their favor. If you want a good system, you don’t have the police making the laws they are going to enforce and that’s exactly was google is doing.
Even though google uses javascript for their ads, did you ever check to see the html it throws off? I notice that for Google Ads…. it doesn’t include a “nofollow” tag. It would seem that what’s good for one should be good for the other regardless of form. If the principal is paid advertising should have a “nofollow” then google should generate “nofollow” on their advertising. Otherwise, google’s argument rings false about delineating the difference between “paid” links and natural links.
One last thing, the bad guys like the spammers and hackers will never be really be impacted by google because they don’t do business in the light of day. Just like most laws, policies and regulations…. they mostly impact the law abiding population.. in this case, websites that actually try to do things right.
November 3, 2007
4:29 am #comment-15
Haha- great post Carl. Nice job setting him up!