Why do hallmarks from web design companies carry so much ranking weight for the recipient website?

[UplinkSpyder]

Website designers/developers place hallmarks (Website Designed by XXXX) in the footer region of the web sites they have designed/built, how much ranking value do these hallmarks have being that they're pointing from sites that are irrelevant to the web designer's, and why?

[Chris.Menke]

There may be value in the domain diversity that they provide.  There's no need to put them on more than a page or two of the client's site.  The fact that they're in the footer reduces their value. the fact that they're on irrelevant websites reduces their value. That many web design firms hammer on the exact match anchor text may be the worst thing about most of them.

Be modest in how many you put on the client's site and diversify your anchor text and you'll be OK.

[MoosaHemani]

Semantically the links in the footer should have to have lowest value but after the panda and penguin update same link in the footer of multiple website may question the quality of link and anchor text.

I think it’s good to have a link from few websites but having link from every website they made with same or slightly varied anchor text might hurt the overall link profile instead of providing benefits.

[GKLA]

I've often wondered if these designers inform their customers that random outbound links on their webpages may affect their search rankings.

Website designers who place hallmarks in the footer section of sites they create, in my opinion are taking advantage of non-tech savvy clients.  Years ago, it probably was a much bigger benefit to the designer, than it is today with the algo changes.  But, it probably still bears some weight.

[UplinkSpyder]

Hello Moosa, thank you for your answer. Case studies in our lab show that both Panda and Penguin have fallen short of what they were supposedly programmed to do - meaning that despite the placement of exact anchor text throughout multiple sites, (hundreds) and on multiple pages of a site, Google's algorithm updates, Panda and Penguin , are apparently failing to devalue their ranking influence. Here's an excerpt from Google Webmaster Tools regarding Link Schemes...

"Your site's ranking in Google search results is partly based on analysis of those sites that link to you. The quantity, quality, and relevance of links influences your ranking. The sites that link to you can provide context about the subject matter of your site, and can indicate its quality and popularity."

I guess with a comment like the one above you can read whatever you want into it. The part that says, "site's that link to you" implies the act of willingly giving a citation. Another is "relevance", if I'm a web designer and put my hallmark on a biochemistry site I built, how is biochemistry (health care, construction, pharmacy, etc) relevant to web design? I don't get it.

Can it be that Google and other search engines give web design sites and their hallmarks special consideration?

[UplinkSpyder]

Hello GKLA, thanks for your response.

What brought this topic to a head was a call I received from a friend who just happens to be a website designer. To simplify things let's call my friend Joe. Joe is a high-end website designer who builds an average of three to four websites a year, and despite what may seem to be a small number of sites, he makes a pretty good living. Joe's designs reflects this artistry and in addition to being a great designer he also as an eye for information architecture. He uses illustrators  photographers, and content writers who are on top of their game, so most of his creations are co-produced. His own website/domain is about 7 years old and though classy and well structured, competitor websites of lesser quality and substance are always out ranking Joe's site, so I did a competitive analysis to see what was going on.

In examining Joe's competitors, I looked at other probable ranking variables and found the hallmarks as being the major contributing factor to their superior ranking in comparison to Joe's website. Joe guards his links and is very selective when it comes to giving and receiving links. Surprisingly, Joe doesn't use hallmarks. When I asked him about not using hallmarks Joe replied that it wouldn't be in good taste considering his clients' stature, and I agree.

Obviously the placement of the hallmarks is assumptive on the designer's behalf, meaning that they were placed on the host sites probably without the direct approval or acknowledgement of the client, a common practice among web designers, so they're not really earned links by definition (merit). I too share the opinion that website designers who place hallmarks on the sites they create without disclosure or grant are taking advantage of their clients as well as taking advantage of a linking scheme available only to them, website designers. I mean, what other industry or practice on the Internet gets to use and benefit from hallmarks as a ranking factor?

[UplinkSpyder]

You would think...

Hey there Chris, thanks for contributing. I agree with everything you said, but something seems to be amiss with what's going on. There's the "should be", if we go by Google, and there's the "what is", when we look at how things really play out in the real world of ranking.

I don't want to beat a dead horse, the subject has been brought up many times before on how so many websites  seem to get away with what appears to be blunt infractions of Google's rules, but in all honesty, I never before had to consider hallmarks as a competing factor, I don't even know how they're perceived by search engines.

How would a website designer who builds high quality sites but in small numbers compete with a designer who spits out low quality sites in high numbers? Should hallmarks be a contributing factor? Do they have a rightful place in influencing rank?