Hi Avi,

I have also used youtube videos on sites without using the scheme.org video markup and they have been showing up in serps as well. There's an interesting article, where this was tested by an SEO who also concluded that you don't need the scheme.org markup for Youtube videos:

http://www.reelseo.com/embedded-youtube-indexed-google/

Considering Google owns Youtube, I guess it's no surprise!

Adam.

A crawl of a website will do this such as the crawl test tool from SEOmoz. This will crawl up to 3,000 pages and can be found under the research tools tab.

Alternatively you could use the Screaming Frog SEO Spider which will crawl 500 urls for free or for £99 a year, the 500 url limit is removed.

Both crawl reports will give you detailed info about redirects.

Adam.

It would be very hard for anyone, other than those in the know at Google, to assign a value to this.

On the face of it, you would have to say that the .edu link would be more valuable considering what we know about Google assigning more value and trust to .edu sites but that's not to say all .edu links are way more valuable than a .com.

First, check both the .com and .edu in open site explorer to gain an indication of authority from SEOmoz's domain authority metric. You then have to assign your own value to the link in terms of relevance. Is the .com link more relevant to your site? If so, then it may actually be more valuable to you than the .edu link.

You absolutely should not make the links nofollow. Google does not mention making the links no follow and as far as I know, I don't think the guys at SEOmoz would recommend you to make the links nofollow. This is because you would miss out on link juice to these inner pages by making the links nofollow.

Here is a link which will provide you more information about using rel="next" rel="prev"

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/video-about-pagination-with-relnext-and.html

Hope this helps,

Adam.

Jamie is right. You will experience much larger competition in google.com than google.com.au based on the market size alone. Couple this with the fact that your particular industry is also very competitive.

Yes, it will probably help to have the .com when trying to rank in google.com but as Jamie rightly states, there are other elements of your SEO strategy that need attention first.

As well as your on-page issues, having had a quick look at your backlink profile, I would suggest that you do not have anywhere near enough links to compete with the major players in your market such as cashbackforex.com

Adam.

I completely agree with Ben.

You can find a lot of useful info on the Warrior forums and there are some really good SEO's on there but you often have to wade through a lot of misleading information to get to the real pearls of wisdom. I probably wouldn't pay for acces to it either.

You can implement a meta refresh as follows:

This will delay the redirect to domainB.com by 10 seconds. It will pass some link juice but not much. It is not best practice to do this because, as you rightly state, Google does not like this type of redirect (due to spam abuse) and the loss of link juice.

I would suggest you just 301 redirect to new site and run a 'welcome to our new site' page on the new domain for the first few weeks while people adjust. You'd be surprised how quickly people adjust to new sites.

Adam.

I'm not sure I understand why the site owner seems to think that the duplicate content is necessary?

If I was in your situation I would be trying to convince the client to remove the duplicate content from their site, rather than trying to find a way around it.

If the information is difficult to find then this may be due to a problem with the site architecture. If the site does not flow well enough for visitors to find the information they need, then perhaps a site redesign is necessary.