Nate Klaiber

51 Comments Add your comment

1. David Skorepa October 30th, 2009

   Nate, that was very well said. You have scratched an itch that I think many honest, hard working web design and development firms have been scratching at for a long a time. I hope the others take note. Thank you for shining a much needed light on this shady practice.

2. Beth October 30th, 2009

   I think it's really, really tacky and a relic from the 90s. You don't see the Happy Cogs and well reputed agencies of this world forcing their brand onto their client's deliverables. There's only one exception, and even this is still iffy to me: if you donate a site to a non-profit.

   Agency stamp on client work: used car salesman sleaze.

3. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

   @David - Thanks. I hope to see this disappear, too - and I hope clients become more educated on the issue.

   @Beth - Agreed. It is very contextual, and a relic from 'old techinques' that people used to use. Happy Cog is a good example, and I can point out a handful of other examples. I have to think more on the non-profit site donation. hmmm.

4. Eric October 30th, 2009

   I definitely agree, it is tacky and hampers the overall aesthetic of a site. When you see a great ad on tv or a brochure or something you don't see "Commercial by Ogilvy Mather" at the end or, it just sprung up as a web design phenomenon.
   Your post was agency oriented; but to play Devil's Advocate I wonder if you think the same applies for web tools. For example, 'Reflect your site' at the bottom of this very page. Sometimes site owners themselves put callouts to the tools they use because they want to share them with others, which is valid of course (and that may be the case with Reflect, I don't know). But other times, the tools insert links in footers, or in source code, etc that you have to actively disable. To me, that's basically the same as an agency putting their link in.

5. Geoff Karcher October 30th, 2009

   Eric, you make a very good point. If you look through Nate's other sites, you'll similar "distractions". I find it ironic.

   Of course, I'm the "shady one" in this discussion.

6. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

   @Eric - There is a big difference. I was a core developer building Reflect. It's a tool I built. The same is true for my reviews site, which links to Clear Function. These are all my sites - or sites related to my work. It's personal - there is no client in the middle. Aaron Boeving did the design for the site, and we agreed I would link to Clear Function in exchange for the design. This was an agreed upon exchange for services.

   There is a distinct difference between inter-linking services, and trying to use clients for free marketing. IE: Basecamp puts links at the bottom to all of their services, and their parent company. That makes perfect sense. It is their internal marketing decision to do so.

   If you look at client sites of Reflect, we don't put the 'powered by' at the bottom - at most there will be an Admin link for use by the client.

   Those examples are different than the argument being made in this article.

   Personally, I never liked when Wordpress injected it stuff at the bottom, either. This is one of the contextual things I am referring to.

   You make good points - I appreciate you playing the Devil's Advocate :)

   @Geoff
   I look forward to a response that actually addresses the inconsistencies and fallacies in your reasoning. I didn't refer to you as shady, though I can see how that's implied.

7. Collyn October 30th, 2009

   I’d like to add that from a user perspective, I like to know who designed/developed the site especially if it is well done. After all, it’s the web designer’s “craft” and they are the ones responsible for representing that business on the web.

8. Eric Wiley October 30th, 2009

   Nate, I was happy to see someone else besides me has noticed the annoying 'car stamping' tactic. I could never understand why someone would pay ten grand & up for a car and then let someone stick a dealership logo on the back of it (especially when they attach it crookedly or when the dealership logo is the most prominent element).

   [Everything I say after this is covered by the blanket assumption that the client is aware of & amenable to the web dev co's link on their site.]

   I don't have the same negative reaction to a development company link at the bottom of a client site as I do a dealership logo on the back of a car. To contrast with the car dealership example, I can't imagine someone seeing a car and proclaiming, "Where can I get a Mazda like that? There's a dealership logo on the trunk (praise God) ::dialing 411::"

   The difference is, good cars are a commodity. Good web development isn't; and is a lot harder for the average person to find.

   I'm not taking an opposite stance to what you wrote. In some cases, the client is getting taken advantage of. But that is certainly not always the case. Many solid people and teams still put 'The Link' at the bottom of their well-crafted sites, with the result being other fortunate people stumble upon a good resource and benefit from finding it.

9. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

   @Collyn - You are coming at this from the wrong perspective. You work for an agency. This is your context. You can't help but think about the design of sites, because you spend your time immersed in this as your livelihood.

   You are not always your clients target audience.

   Most likely, the people browsing client sites aren't even thinking "Hmm, I wonder who created this website". These visitors may not care, or ever even have a need for a website. They are the customers of the client. They are coming to purchase something. They are coming to find out how to solve a problem within the domain of the client. Those links are noise. Distraction. It's about the customer, not about your web design business.

   A professional designer knows this. Their design succeeds when it gets out of the way of people trying to achieve a task. Great design is invisible.

   The agency has a responsibility in representing the business on the web, but that ends when they hand over the work to the client. Now it is up to the client to reap the rewards of having a professional site developed, void of the noise and stampings. Not every site needs a colophon, especially when it's out of context of the needs of the target audience.

10. David Mead October 30th, 2009

    I think you've raised some good points here Nate.

    As Beth mentioned (though I don't know about being tacky) it was just one-of-those-things that you did (with client permission). There are still a couple of older sites of mine hanging around that have a "Built by DMWebsites" link in the footer, but I personally stopped doing it after a while.

    I think its one of the first things that you drop, the more you hone your craft and your confidence grows. Putting the client's business needs before your own.

11. Geoff Karcher October 30th, 2009

    Just for fun, browse to the bottoms of these sites, you may be surprised to see that even the "Happy Cogs and well reputed agencies of this world" still practice this.
    
    http://www.comhaltas.ie
    http://www.booksamillion.com
    http://www.housingworks.org
    http://www.smerickson.com
    
    @Nate I'm OK with implications. I know you well enough to know that you mean well.
    
    I'm not afraid to admit that there is a self promotional aspect, as I did in my original comments. However, that is not the only reason we do it.
    
    However, as you and I discussed when you were interviewing with us last year, TKG blends business principles with web design and development. For our good, and for the good of our clients. If you will remember, you acknowledged that on several topics we previously debated, you had not considered real world and business perspectives only the "purist css developer standpoint". We focus on more than the shear graphic appeal of a site.
    
    The example of a non-profit is one example. Maybe a bad one, unless you have a somewhat open mind. Another example, is e-commerce. As you know there times when merchant processors have issues (again Nate, this is just one example not a detailed case study). It often happens late at night. We have been there on several occasions to offer ordering support to our client's site users in those instances.
    
    And to answer your question, yes. We do have a policy and infrastructure in place to respond to service requests 24/7.

12. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

    @Eric
    I agree wholeheartedly that good web development is hard to find. No argument there. With this, I feel that the burden to market your good web development firm is on your shoulders. Market your work on your site. Publish a useful portfolio. Send out press releases. Whatever you so choose to do. I always like <a href="http://www.minchdesign.com/portfolio/">Craig Minch's Portfolio</> as an example. It's his site. It gives context to the work he did. It shows who he worked with. It shows images and links to the work. He gives context - yet I don't see a footer on the Cleveland Clinic Website that said 'Designed by Craig Minch'. Good design is invisible and ultimately achieves the goals for the end client and their target customer base.

    Again, as with Collyn's example, you come at this from your context as a web developer. I am guilty of doing the same thing. It's our context. We have to constantly remind ourself that we are not always our clients target audience - nor will their visitors be coming in search of a website development agency.

    It's backwards. Just because we build things for clients, doesn't mean we have a right to use them as a marketing avenue moving forward. It's our job to get out of the way and let them succeed with their business.

    @David
    I was guilty of this in the past, too - so I completely understand. You also hit the nail on the head, in that this is one of the first things you drop once you hone your craft and your confidence. I believe it comes with experience, understanding, and knowledge.

13. David Skorepa October 30th, 2009

    @Collyn - From my experience, if a user is that motivated to contact the firm who designed/developed a particular website, they'll call and ask the website's owner. No link needed.

    @David - Even with a client's permission, the client may not be fully aware of why this practice should be frowned upon.

14. Collyn October 30th, 2009

    I DO happen to be one of those people who thinks, "hmmm...who designed this website?" It's not because I'm in the business (I happen to be a marketer by trade, not a designer) but because I'm naturally curious and find it helpful. To me, it's hardly a distraction as long as it's positioned and sized correctly - and a far better alternative than having to call the website owner to find out who designed the site.

    Also I think the car dealership example falls flat for the reasons Eric W mentions. A car is a car no matter where buy it. Not true with great web design -- which can be very difficult to find.

    PS - are Geoff's comments being blocked or something?

15. Craig Minch October 30th, 2009

    I came up through the ranks of the agency environment. Tramp stamping was prime if you could get away with it. I won't lie, I still have a few stamps out there.

    It wasn't until I became independent that I learned that the leads that came from stamps weren't worth much. Folks only wanted a price, they didn't care how it worked, what was under the hood or how it handled. They would stop by, kick the tires and leave if the price was out of their range. I wasted a lot of time back then.

    Nowadays I'd say its far more valuable to not have a tramp stamp. Put a good product out there and if someone really likes it and HAS to know who put it together they'll contact your client. This is more valuable than any stamp. If you've done a good job then the referral will still happen. You'll get far less leads, but they will be much more valuable and qualified in the end.

16. Geoff Karcher October 30th, 2009

    Thanks for unblocking the comments I made earlier. It would have been nice if they had been posted in the timely context of the debate, but hey, it's your blog and your right to censor I guess.

    As I did in the reference made earlier to Happy Cogs, I suggest you look at the other sites you are referencing. Just as Happy Cogs still employs this technique (although they typically use a graphic logo in addition to the text link much like the reflect your site logo Clear Function has). Sprocket (who, if I understand correctly Craig Mich does a lot of work for) also does the same, text link and graphic logo.

17. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

    @Collyn
    As David mentioned, if a user is motivated - they can find the information they need. It's about percentages here when it comes to usefulness. If a client site gets 1000 visitors, and 1 of those clicked through the link as a legitimate contact on your links - that's not good numbers for the end client. Remember, this is about THEM, not US. They shouldn't be responsible for our marketing. They should be responsible for their own brand and identity. Where does it stop? Should be put links to Adobe PhotoShop on the page, too - after all, they assisted in the site design. How about your WYSIWYG editor you use, should you link to that, too? Maybe you should link to those things from your own site - why don't you do that? Why aren't there links to your tools that helped you create the website?

    Far fetched example? Maybe. But again, it's about the client - not you.

    As for the car example, I don't believe it falls flat on it's face. As a marketer I am sure you realize how much they advertise EVERYWHERE - even though a 'Mazda' is a commodity. They are vying for attention to sell the car before another dealership, just as you are vying for attention to sell the next website for your competition. There are many correlations to be had here.

    As for Geoff's comments, no - they were flagged as Spam - I just let his last comment through.

    @Geoff
    "And to answer your question, yes. We do have a policy and infrastructure in place to respond to service requests 24/7." Please elaborate.

    Your example of e-commerce is support that you should be offering with your e-commerce solution. That is with your application. This is not the same support you were implying in your post, where you could speak on behalf of your clients. I want to see examples of that - not support related to your product. I agree that should be there.

    We have had several discussions related to the professional quality of an agency, hence the reason I am not working with TKG. I don't believe your practices are focused on caring for your clients. You have other intentions. I won't go any further than to just say that.

18. Garrett St. John October 30th, 2009

    Great article and great comments. Thanks!

    It's definitely made me think about our policy at Blue Ember Design. For smaller clients, we typically still will inconspicuously tag a site with our link just a shade darker/lighter than the background color. We've felt that this serves a marketing purpose, but avoids being intrusive or distracting. We have seen a fair amount of traffic through those links, but I will have to say that the conversion rate is quite low from our experience.

    With larger clients we will always avoid putting a tag as they typically are well-focused on their brand and aesthetic. We've found that it just doesn't feel natural to have that tag there as a sort of bumper sticker for our company. I guess the question is why should a smaller client be treated any differently as we try to build their brand than we would with a larger, more prominent company? Answer is likely that they shouldn't.

    Great food for thought! Now off to edit footer templates...

19. Geoff Karcher October 30th, 2009

    @Craig. I must have been timing poorly and posted just as you did. I agree, if this were only about references we would not do it either. However, I will admit our experience has been very different.

    It is also different from an agency perspective, I believe. We have more to promote and people to keep employed, thus the volume we have to promote and sell is naturally different.

    @David Mead: I don't disagree with the point about honing your skills. Another thing to acknowledge though is that as an independent your goals are different. You may or may not have a consistent brand over the course of several years, making this kind of thing tougher to do.

20. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

    @Garrett St. John
    Thanks for the insight. I am definitely not out to label everyone who practices this as a bad web development company, I just hope that we can see it stop in the future - to put the focus where it really belongs.

    As I said, I have been guilty of this in the past, too - and when I really evaluated the usefulness of it, I came to the same conclusions that you and Craig Minch have mentioned - they weren't quality leads. They were people looking to get something done fast. They were client competitors who were told by upper management that they needed a website. They visited a competitor website, clicked on the link, and would try and haggle for a cheap/quick website.

    It wasn't about quality - it was about quantity. This equates to wasted time, no matter if you are an individual or an agency.

21. Geoff Karcher October 30th, 2009

    So Nate, what you are saying in your reply to Garrett St. John, is what lead you to quit was when you realized it was not benefiting Nate Klaiber.

    In the end your focus wasn't on the clients.

    hmmm..

22. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

    @Geoff
    *sigh* I was sharing with them, the same sentiments they found in their respective businesses. The leads coming through there are rarely quality leads.

    It led me to realize that I was trying to put the focus on me by putting that link there in the first place. I found that I was wrong in my blind assumptions - which were to put the link in the footer. I did it because, "hey, everyone else did it". I never evaluated WHY I would do that. I swallowed my pride and realized I was wrong.

    If anything, this put more of the focus on the client, and away from me - not sure how your last statement should be taken. It was me realizing my role was to stay in the background. It was to produce the best quality work, and in the end, help the client succeed in their business ventures and goals.

23. Vince Frantz October 30th, 2009

    Yeah so I went out to take the "Toyota of Bedford" off my license plate and was thankful that was over and done with finally. Too long have I given them all the Minivan business in Lakewood.

    I was about to go in when I noticed that the tires weren't by Toyota....

    Wha wha wha whaaaaaaaa?

    Who is trying to jump on toyota's game!

    Holy crap - i am looking over this thing and realizing that Toyota actually only makes cup holders! WTF!

    Seriously folks - we have put Sprokets name on a grand total of 2 websites (both were actually 100% designed, written, hosted and manufactured by Sprokets).

    The bottom line is that it will never go away and should never go away. But it doesn't always need to be practiced. We didn't put it on any site since 2007 and have been too lazy or busy to put it on the any after that. At some point you realize that the best site you ever did is the one you are working on now so don't go stamping your soon-to-be antique work. Just tuck it in your portfolio and make sure your JS contains references to your brand in there...

    Ahem.. uhhh.. the "good" leads actually View Source ;)

    Hell most of our clients think their Basecamp project is the Sprokets website anyway.

24. Geoff Karcher October 30th, 2009

    At the end of the day, we are making an issue out of almost nothing.

    As Nate says, the focus should be on our clients.

    The sites we generate, and I am confident that those of the others posting here, generate results. We have many case studies that illustrate that.

    In the end, they are generating new and profitable business for our clients, thus the reason clients stay with us.

25. vince Frantz October 30th, 2009

    "Hell most of our clients think their Basecamp project is the Sprokets website anyway."

    ...and by that i am referring to our utter lack of a sprokets website/blog/newsletter etc. Not cracking on our clients.

26. Chris October 30th, 2009

    @Nate
    I am the type of car buyer that pulls that sticker off the back of my car in front of the salesman before driving off the lot, just to break his heart a little. In this case I understand why the dealer is tagging my vehicle, for pure advertisement. Much like trolling for controversy with blog posts. 

    We're all in the industry where a kid in a basement can build something amazing and get into the pros or put us all out of business. I guess if you ride coat tails and shout loud enough that can get your name out there too

27. Nate Klaiber October 30th, 2009

    @Chris
    Good point. People stamp like that for pure advertisement. Hence the topic of discussion.

    You are right, instead of asking in-depth questions about practices in our industry, it's better to just do things blindly than to be educated on why you make the decisions you make. This evolved out of a discussion. First was the post from WRL, then the response from your boss. His response was filled with so many fallacies - fallacies he still has yet to address - that I decided to pose the question for other people, and look deeper into his initial response to Dennis. I wanted to provoke thought, and I have received some very intelligent responses to the matter.

    All blog posts should just say the same thing and everyone should agree, and if someone posts a blog that isn't in line with your belief system, then it must be someone trolling. Stupid Internet. We should fix that. *sigh*

    Now, had I been trolling for controversy with a blog post, I may have structured my page title to say something like "WRL Advertising Blog | Footer Links | Dennis Warner", instead of the title I created for the rest of my human visitors.

    You are very right, in that we are in an industry where there are no real standards bodies to enforce quality work from people. I choose to hold my tongue with that topic.

    So, defending your boss aside - I am still waiting for responses to the questions posed. I am interested in this free, 24/7 support system, that makes these stamps worthwhile on client sites. As someone who works there, what does this look like?

28. Anonymous Coward October 31st, 2009

    Maybe if some of these companies added it on, their employees wouldn't be loosing benefits, days at work and taking pay cuts. Seems that the companies using these are successful and I must admit they're clients are thriving.

29. Nate Klaiber October 31st, 2009

    @Anonymous Coward
    That is extremely faulty logic. There are no direct correlations to any of that. I know of a handful of companies who stamp a client website and are just trying to keep their head above water. I also know many companies who won't stamp a client site and are thriving.

    Next time please provide context and specific examples. 'I must admit their clients are thriving' is a very broad sweeping statement.

30. Geoff Karcher October 31st, 2009

    I'd like to clarify one thing briefly.

    In responding to the other shops (Sprocket, Happy Cog, Clear Function etc.).

    I meant nothing negative toward those shops. They are all great shops in their own respect and do quality work as far as I can tell.

    I was simply illustrating that this "stamping" practice (which I clearly believe to be legitimate) is not only practiced by a handful of evil agencies.

    Some have stopped for their own reasons, some of us have continued it.

    Differences of opinion do not necessarily equate to dishonesty or "shady tactics".

    I want to reinforce, that in no way do I intend to "sling mud" at any other shop. I see nothing wrong at all with those that I have pointed out are still (or recently) doing this. I was only trying to clear up some misinformation or assumptions.

31. Dennis Warner November 1st, 2009

    How's everybody doing?

    I'd like to start by saying that healthy debate and competition is good for the industry.

    WRL is a full service ad agency that has been around for over 50 years and has done web design for clients since the late nineties.

    I think it should be no surprise based on my blog article (http://www.wrladv.com/blog/it-is-your-website) that we at WRL do not feel putting our name at the bottom of the sites we develop provides our customers benefit. In fact, for many reasons that Nate Klaiber touched on, we feel it is a disservice to them.

    Geoff seems to feel differently, and he is entitled to his opinion (which he has expressed in several different places).

    I will elaborate on our reasoning, though:

    Customer Service

    ----------------

    We do not believe that a "Web Design and Hosting by WRL Advertising" is going to be seen or used as a support link by our clients' visitors. Most likely, visitors having issues will never follow that link and at worse, it adds clicks and confusion to the situation.

    If a site is launching, we will watch the logs for the first couple of days, since as much as possible, we prefer to be proactive to website issues.
    Programming has changed since the early days of the web, and so that after a site is live, we are notified of any code issues as they happen. Because of this, we often have issues fixed "before" we ever get contacted by clients.

    And if the client wants their agency to field those support requests, I suggest aliasing webmaster@domain.com to your agency and having a drop down in the contact form for "Website Support" requests that gets forwarded to those that are providing support.

    So, I refer to these links as "ads," because I do not see them as "customer service" links.

    Our Clients' Branding

    ---------------------

    We build websites for other businesses who are trying to sell "their" products and services.

    Let me give you an example of the danger of putting your agency's ad at the bottom of your client's sites:

    During the quoting of a website, I searched for this potential client on Google. What I found was their listing had an appropriate title, but the description of the page included the agency's "Web Design and Hosting by X" information. Talk about bad branding.

    Why did this happen? If you don't provide a meta description, Google will make its best guess as to the description of the page. In this case Google guessed wrong, and instead of branding the client, the web design company was taking up this valuable space. When branding and converting is the name of the game, this isn't acceptable. Mistakes like this could be avoided if the homepage had content that concentrated on the client's services.

    @Nate - Thanks for your perspective. I have great respect for your opinion.

    @Collyn - There is more than one way to help figure out who designed a site.

    Should the industry standard be to use a meta tag or a comment instead? What better way can the industry come up with than footer links located on the client's real estate?

    "To me, it's hardly a distraction as long as it's positioned and sized correctly."

    Nate K. referenced this site, so I will use it as an example:

    http://www.remconwaterjet.com

    This is no spacing between an important piece of contact information and the web designer link.

    @Eric - Many open source applications and tools put a plug for their tool in the footer. For the amount of free source code you get, this is a steal. Plus, there is nothing in the MIT, BSD or GPL licenses that prevents you from taking those links out. That's the beauty of those licenses and having access to the source code.

    @Geoff - Geoff, if you ask your client's permission, and you and the client think these links don't distract from your client's brand, more power to you. But seeing these links as a "service" and the best thing for the client is something you and I will have to agree to disagree on.

    DW

32. Geoff Karcher November 1st, 2009

    @Dennis. Glad you jumped into this!

    With regard to the customer service aspect of fixing errors I agree with you. That should not be necessary.

    The service aspect I was describing is more in line with becoming a tiny extension of the client's team. We have been contacted numerous times in the "off hours" for things like corrections of mis-information accidentally posted via the CMS, checkout issues due to Verisign issues, new functionality requests etc. In these instances, we have been able to respond on our clients behalf and help them retain a user/sale or redirect to correct content.

    These kinds of things don't happen every single day, but often enough that I believe it ads value. Especially with highly visible sites.

    Regarding the Remcon site: I agree, that could stand to have a line break between the address and our link.

    Something that we haven't addressed on here is that the clients know it is there and they know what it is. I know it's been said that they need "educated". I agree that there is lots of room in this industry to mislead clients on certain things and it happens all the time. But lets step back for a moment here, do we all really think we need to teach a business owner or marketing manager how to read and that it's our name in the footer? Do we really think the average client is virtually illiterate? Lets give them a tad bit of credit.

    They may not understand web standards, site architecture, SEO, etc. And it's not their job to. But implying that they can't understand the difference between their name and ours is a bit of a stretch isn't it?

33. Dennis Warner November 1st, 2009

    Geoff - I'm all for helping clients by becoming an "extension of the client's team." I just feel putting the design firm's link on the site is the wrong way to go about it.

    If this is an agency's goal, the link would read:
    "Site Support by CompanyX" and would lead directly to a form where the visitor could easily contact them about support issues.

    Consider my post above about using aliases and dropdowns on contact forms for a cleaner, more consistently reliable and less confusing way to provide support for the end user.

    Food for thought:
    Let's say your business gets contacted through your link and you and your staff give great customer service. Now, the next site the visitor has problems with has a link to the design firm in the footer. Since it worked so well when they contacted you, they contact this design firm for a resolution . . . but the design firm no longer supports that client. Because of this, the user doesn't here anything back for days, and the response they do hear back is that they should contact the actual company who's website they were having issues with.

    Your business might provide great support, but all might not. We should teach users this is NOT the way to get support. We should teach users to contact webmaster@ (which can be aliased) or to use the contact form.

    Please don't think that my blog article comes from no where. Clients that used to be with our competitors have confided in us that those competitors (which will be left unnamed) did not ask permission to put their "ad" on the bottom of their site.

    And they had no idea that Google might pick that info up on accident, or about some of the other pitfalls of this practice.

    And even though they may be experts on their service or product, they may need some help with keeping up with website branding concepts and best practices. That's why they hire us, right?

    To your last two paragraph's points, I will just say again that as the experts, it is our job to bring up the pitfalls to something they may believe is benign.

    These are my thoughts on the subject. Thanks for yours.

    Sincerely,
    Dennis

34. Nate Klaiber November 1st, 2009

    @Dennis
    The points you make speak directly the questions I posed in the first place.

    IF the links are there solely for 'customer service', then why aren't they just embedded in the branded customer service stream?

    IF the links are there solely for 'customer service', then why isn't the link phrased around customer service verbiage?

    IF the links are there solely for 'customer service', then why are the links pointing directly to their web design and web hosting services?

35. Geoff November 1st, 2009

    @Nate. Has anyone said or implied the links are there solely for customer service?

    @Dennis. I can certainly see the validity to your points. If the shops clients choose to move to do not remove these links it can cause trouble. We follow up and in most cases when it is overlooked it gets corrected. I also agree that we all owe it to our clients to share our opinions.

36. Nate Klaiber November 2nd, 2009

    @Geoff
    Re-read your own blog post, and then tell me the majority of your reasoning doesn't revolve around the perceived 'service' or 'value-add' it offers your clients. You can even read a few comments up if you'd like.

    So, if it's not about the customer service, then what is it about? What are the value of the links? How are they relevant or pertinent to your end client's target market?

37. Geoff Karcher November 2nd, 2009

    So, I took your advice, and re-read both my original post and the comments I've made here.

    It seems that throughout both, I have been up front about the dual purpose of these. I haven't said, or implied, that they are "solely for customer service". As an example, below is a quote from my original post:

    "Is there a self serving aspect to it? Sure. Can it be a promotional tool? Yes. But if you are proud of your work, and your clients are proud of the work you have done for them, 99% of the time, they are happy to have it there. It is not all that different than building a portfolio, asking for a client referral, or including PR contact info in a professional press release for that matter."

    I will agree, I didn't spend much time describing how the promotional aspect works. Primarily because I think that's rather obvious.

38. Nate Klaiber November 2nd, 2009

    @Geoff
    I will re-phrase then. 90% of your post was about the 'value' it provided your clients.

    So which is it?

    Promotional tool - Do you pay your clients to have your name embedded into their website they paid you for? Is this a contract that you get to put your brand on their site?

    It's more obvious you attempt to use this as a 'promotional' tool - simply based on your generous wording and destination links. It's clear by those that they aren't placed there for support.

    Dennis then questioned this practice as something that was a remnant of years ago, and should be re-considered by professionals. This was the premise of his article.

    Then you defended it in your post by saying it was a 'service', and that, if web developers...

    "...expect to be in web design business for the long term; my advice is to offer them this service." Implying that people who didn't practice this would struggle? I am still fuzzy on this 'service' based on your implementation.

    Or how about:

    "I can imagine how those relatively new to the web development industry may not have experienced the value that it adds to the end user, who we should all be focused on. Having been focused on the web development business for over 15 years being involved in the development and support of hundreds of sites, we have found this practice to be very useful for the visitors of our clients’ sites."

    Implying that people who won't practice this are 'new to the web development industry' and have no 'experience'.

    I'd like to say that 'time in the industry' does not directly correlate to quality.

    Hundreds of sites. And you are an extension to all of their customer service streams? Quantity does not equal quality.

    Useful to the visitors of your clients' sites? If you were really trying to make this useful, then why are you linking to your services page - why not link to a support page? Doesn't seem like the visitors of your clients' sites are sitting at the forefront for your reasoning. IF it was about the user and customer service - true value - then why require several clicks?

    Your arguments simply don't add up, and you bounce back and forth between the two - one minute it's promotional, the next minute it's a 'service' - but your implementation is clear on your intent and purpose. It's this intent and purpose that Dennis speaks of as unprofessional.

39. Geoff November 2nd, 2009

    @ Nate,

    You keep asking "which is it". My answer is "both". It's not "solely" about promo. And it's not "solely" about service.

    I know you like absolutes, but unfortunately there are few in this world. Some things just have more than one purpose.

    With regard to the implications that you have read into my comments, those are your own ideas and implications, so I don't really see a need to address them.

    I believe that Dennis and I are on the same page in one respect. I see his point with regard to the focus on the client's brand. I respect his opinion and it's definitely a valid opinion with some good reason behind it. I happen to have another opinion, but that doesn't make his "wrong". Just different. I think, at least, that he and I are able to agree to disagree.

40. Nate Klaiber November 2nd, 2009

    @Geoff
    1. I can definitely agree to disagree with you - but if you are going to bring an argument to the table, you should be able to qualify it as a valid option. I don't believe opinions 'just because you said so' or just because of 'experience'.

    2. It's amazing how much your tone shifts from comment to comment, and how you have come full circle. First you try and point to other sites, while not addressing the questions at hand. Then you claim you do it mainly for the 'services' it provides to your clients. Then you couldn't adequately explain what this 'service' looks like given the context of TKG's current portfolio and clients. Then, you shift it to it not being just about 'service' - but there is also a promotional value. It's this perceived 'promotional value' that Dennis and I were debating in the first place. Interesting how your post, which was a response to Dennis and had attempts to belittle him, are now turned into 'Dennis and I are on the same page...'. If it's about both - then given your portfolio, you should be paying your clients for advertising on a product they paid for.

    3. I am not seeking absolutes, I am trying to make sense of your logic used to make your decisions, which simply doesn't line up with your actions. I do believe, given your context, portfolio, and circular reasoning, that you are wrong in placing these links on clients' websites. I will say that. It's why I wrote the post in the first place - to encourage to think twice before applying this 'promotion' or 'service' on their clients' sites. Because, as you said, it's about the end user.

    In the end, you still haven't qualified anything - and I think it's safe to say this conversation has run it's course. There is no reason to beat a dead horse.

41. Geoff Karcher November 3rd, 2009

    I completely agree. (hey, we agreed on something!) I think this convo ran its course about 25 posts ago.

    I think we are trying to make a monumental debate over a tiny issue. Debate for the sake of debate and attention.

    I still want to clarify that I did not point to other sites. I only corrected the misinformation that was provided about them in some comments. Some were thrown out as examples of shops that do not use stamps that do in fact do it, or at least the sites in their portfolios have them. I was hoping that would illustrate the point that very quality shops/groups that other members of the discussion respect, include them. Somehow, you seemed to view that as mudslinging which is unfortunate, because I think they are good shops using a legit tactic.

42. Dennis Warner November 3rd, 2009

    Stay tuned for "Web Presence Branding (Part 2)."

    ;-)

    DW

43. Beth November 4th, 2009

    In reply to Geoff's attempt to paint Happy Cog in the tramp stamp camp, the Happy Cog sites chosen are poor examples for your argument. One is ten years old, remember I said this was a relic of the 90s? The other is for a non-profit which is also sporting a giant Media Temple hosting badge, so I have to imagine there was some donation happening here.

    Frankly, I think doing this practice on a modern website outside the context of a non-profit / donation reeks of desperation.

    All that aside, I can't imagine the type of client such a practice would bring you would be the ideal kind to work with. "Oh, I'm too lazy to look for a web designer. Hrm let me see who these people used. Done!"

44. Geoff Karcher November 4th, 2009

    Hi Beth,

    My intent isn't to paint anyone into any camp. Happy Cog, and others, I am sure can speak for themselves more accurately than you or I can.

    I was purely addressing some incorrect statements made in earlier posts. I did give a few examples, but if you look closer at these portfolios, you'll see that the sites I provided are not the only ones and a variety of types of companies, organizations and recent time frames are there.

    With regard to your comments about the promotional aspect reeking of desperation. That's your opinion, which is cool.

    Obviously, our experience with the promotional aspect has been quite different than what it sounds like most involved in this discussion have had.

45. Nate Klaiber November 4th, 2009

    @Beth
    Agreed. I didn't bring them into the conversation. This was a quick dodge from the real questions in the original post, by Geoff, to try and justify TKG's actions.

    @Geoff
    What were the incorrect statements? The companies you point do don't practice it anymore, with the exception of work that was donated. Some of those companies/individuals even chimed in to say they don't believe/practice it anymore.

    Your 'experience' - you keep saying this, but you never qualify it with anything. You use your self-praised catch phrases like (mostly to try and qualify yourself to those who may not understand this industry):

    "...to do it that only experience in the industry will prove out"

    Or

    "...you have happy clients and you expect to be in web design business for the long term"

    You talk highly of yourself, but those of us viewing this thread are professionals in the industry, and can see right through that - there are a handful of other agencies that are full of self-praise with very little substance to back that up. That verbiage may work with your clients, but it won't work here - here you have to bring substance to the table.

    You mention that it's not about link-building. I would agree that you will get very little value from these links given the context of the rest of the client's site, but why then, do you only include these links on the homepage of your clients' sites? Why aren't they on the inner pages? If this is a service, then why isn't it used throughout the entire experience the end visitor may have?

    Things simply don't add up with the way you have talked yourself in circles, mind you, still not addressing the original challenge: I want to see specific examples of these statements backed up in action.

46. Danny Sedor November 5th, 2009

    I love the contrasting positions and the dialogue. I am, however sadly, a repeat offender of the stamping you refer to. I am one of the smaller, less significant web designers in the area and have always considered the "stamping" more along the lines of a "tag" or signature that an artist might use. (although I am certainly no Picasso).

    On another note, this is one of the longest comment threads I have seen on a topic such as this, although most of it seemed to be a conversation between colleagues rather than a list of comments.

    Thanks you all for the enlightening read. God Bless.

47. Dennis Warner November 6th, 2009

    @Danny

    There have been several justifications for "stamping" a client's site.

    1. Branding / Advertising
    2. Customer Service (which I've addressed)
    3. Signature / Tagging / Pride

    When we get hired by a client, a web designer or design company may be working on something they are going to put in their portfolio, but they are not working on a personal art project. They are in B2B, and working "for" the client. At that point, everything you do should be in the client's best interest.

    I work with PR people, and they get their "unrestricted" creativity out by writing fiction books and blogs. I work with artists, and they work on creating comics, paintings, etc. afterhours. I work with programmers, and I encourage them to scratch some of their itches and do their bleeding edge programming by working on FOSS (Free and Open Source) projects. On all of those projects, the artists and "code poets" get to sign their name to their work.

    When I buy a painting, I am a consumer. The name may help make the painting more valuable to me in the future. Therefor, as a consumer (and investor), not only don't I mind an artist signing their work, I demand it.

    So, the question is, does putting your name on a site benefit (bring value) to your client? If the answer is no, despite pride, ego, branding or advertising, in my opinion, it should not be done.

48. Brendan November 6th, 2009

    I've been following this conversation since Nate posted it, and no matter how many times I read everything I just cannot see how "tramp stamping" can be presented as anything other than self-promotion.

    Geoff, I think the 40-some comments here could have all been avoided had you just said something along the lines of I understand the argument presented, however having links back to our site has been a valuable promotional tool for us; our clients generally are OK with this and we remove the links if they are not.

    While I still wouldn't agree with the practice I'd accept that that's how you do business, you're upfront about it and that's that.

    I think your argument that the link is there primarily to provide supplementary support for your clients is disingenuous. The footer links don't say "For additional website support contact The Karcher Group", they say (at least on Nate's example, please correct me if I'm wrong) "Web Design and Web Hosting provided by The Karcher Group" with the two links not pointing to a customer support/contact form, but to landing pages.

    If you're not willing or able to provide specific examples of a user seeking and receiving support through you on behalf of your clients I'm afraid I just can't buy your argument.

49. Geoff November 6th, 2009

    Hi Brendan,

    I appreciate your point. I don't know if you've read my original post or not, but I definitely did say that it is about promotion as well.

    The bulk of the discussion in my original post and on Nate's blog has been regarding the "service" aspect. Primarily because that is what people question. The promotional side is rather self explanatory, so it's been largely ignored, maybe painting the picture that I've tried to imply that that is the "sole" reason we do this. Clearly it's not the sole reason, and if it came across that way, I apologize.

    With regard to the service aspect, I did offer a couple of specific examples such as non profits posting wrong info and our team being contacted for correct info. Those examples have been challenged because it is blended with the promotional aspect overshadowing it.

    I do wonder if this has worked for us, from both standpoints, because we work primarily in a rather small community (Stark County). So, when people use our clients sites, many of them know us. Maybe that is why we get contacted by users of our clients sites when our clients are not available, skewing our perspective a bit.

    I would be happy to provide more examples than I have above, however, for obvious reasons it would be ideal not to bring specific clients names into this discussion. I hope you can understand that.

50. Nate Klaiber November 8th, 2009

    @Brendan
    Agreed - It's about self-promotion, and nothing more.

    @Geoff
    "Those examples have been challenged because it is blended with the promotional aspect overshadowing it."

    Challenged? You haven't even provided a concrete example. Not one. Let's work from a concrete example, with context from your portfolio. It would look something like this for a visitor:

    1. Visit the site
    2. Browse to a piece of content (event, news, article, etc). This could be a list or detail page.
    3. Realize they are having trouble finding something, or spot something that is incorrect.
    4. Navigate back to the homepage (because many of your sites only feature the 'support' links on the homepage). They would do this instead of clicking a branded contact link or information link, apparently.
    5. Once on the homepage, they would identify the links of 'website design and development provided by The Karcher Group' - with the name of your company not linked, then click on a page to one of your services. So, they need help about an event - and their instinct is to click a link on the homepage with the title 'Web Design' or 'Web Hosting'?
    6. Land on your web design services page or web hosting page. Then still feel as though they are in the right place to receive support, as your design and architecture are very different from the site they were visiting. These are advertising pages - not easy way to receive support. No links. No forms. No information like 'seeking support for XXXXX?' pointing them into the right direction.
    7. Locate a contact link or contact form. This contact form is very client or future-client focused, not support focused.
    8. Contact you in regards to their findings in step 3.
    ...
    9. Someone from your staff is available 24/7 to handle the requests from the specific client. Multiply this by an array of other support requests that could be coming through from other client sites. Add to this 'international' users in a different timezone than you.
    10. They receive the information they were curios about in Step 3.

    This opens up a whole other array of questions based on the user-centered design of your own site, regardless of the client site.

    It hasn't been overshadowed by promotion, you have never given an actual use case. I think that's mainly because it is about promotion, and you try and make it look as though it's something more. As Brendan said, just call it what it is.

    IF the 'service' is one reason you do this, then why do you make it difficult for a visitor to actually contact your staff?

    IF the 'service' is one reason you do this, then why are your links only embedded on the homepage of most of your clients' sites? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

51. Nate Klaiber November 12th, 2009

    @Brendan
    I think you got the answer you were looking for, in the silence from Geoff. It's about self promotion - period.

    I'd say this topic has run it's course. 50 comments later and he still can't answer the original question at hand. He has diverted to other sites, he's juggled back and forth, but he still can't effectively answer the question. That speaks volumes.

    Thanks for the input, everyone.

Comments are closed.