Why use No Follow? Defeating the purpose?

In using the No Follow option, as it may reduce PR leakage on the page where the ad is located, doesn't it defeat the purpose of giving a link to the ad owner?

 

Well its an ad, it doesn't necessarily have to pass page rank. If you use nofollow then you're more likely to be given the thumbs up by Google.

 

Thanks! It's my understanding (perhaps convoluted) that the more follow links you have pointing outside of a site the more they can drag down it's PR. In addition, don't nofollow links act like no links at all when it comes to total in-linking to a site from other sites? In other words, nofollow is good for the site owner placing the links, but no good for the ad owner who wants the link (juice)?

 

Yeah you're exactly right. You won't give away any of your page rank if all the links are nofollow so yeah its great for you. Obviously you won't get as much weight for it in the CO-OP ad network though.

 

Now that's good to know! Thanks again.

 

On that note, which would also attract more weight - static or dynamic?

 

nofollow links are completely ignored. they're especially good to use on affiliate links.

 

In my opinion, nofollow is a damn trick solution from Google, because Google cannot improve and get a better of them arithmetic!!

 

Well, I converted to FOLLOW, and weight growth has been dismal compared to the old no-follow links.

 

Not everybody is out to make money off of advertisments. An example is wikipedia. They have so much information and so many users, crawler bots would kill the servers. en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt

 

I don't understand your reply. This is nothing about getting advertising exposure but more about getting more wieght so the ads will appear more so they will have a higher chance of creating linkbacks which will help my sites get better indexing.