Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Then I would be looking for that to diversify in some order. If you had 100 links, to have 5-10 with the same anchor text is acceptable, as long as they form part of a sentence. You don't really want links that just sit there on their own amongst other links and that serve no real purpose. There are exceptions to this rule, however.
Would have to see some to give you more of an idea.
Andy
Personally, I don't like long pages of endless text, tend to be over-faced and move on. I much prefer something broken into bite-size chunks.
However, you can't argue with the masses - I can't imagine reading a camera review on DP Review that is 14 pages long, but then all on one page!
There should be no SEO downside whichever way you go, as long as the article is good.
Try Open Site Explorer here Jason.
Also, building links to a wide selection of pages, and not all to the home page, is a positive, not a negative. However, diverse anchor texts and related referring sites play a big part in this and as long as a link has a good reason to exist on a page, I am sure Google will see this as a plus.
Andy
I think that most would see this as a spammy way to communicate. I have seen these before and all I do is delete them.
You may get a small amount of success, but it's the same as the Twitter invites - they get looked on as spam by just about everyone who receives them.
Andy
Never an easy question and I have no doubt you will be scratching your head a little after everyone has contributed because each SEO has a different way of charging, different rates and different strategies.
The only things I can tell you that will be (should be) the top of the lists for any SEO are, in no order:
These are all based on some of the latest algorithm updates that Google is targeting heavily.
As for what to spend - how long is the proverbial piece of string? $99 might be a really good price if you are getting loads of really great work completed, but in reality, how much manual work will be done for this price?
At £250, that is a low-end daily rate with £750 being something towards the top end of daily rates (top being around £900 per day).
Try and get examples of past work and get a detailed breakdown of all of the manual work that is to be carried out. Steer clear of anyone who tells you they will build links to directories or do article marketing or that uses tools to complete important tasks.
Hope that helps a little.
Andy
I would be tempted to look at adding some Schema.org metadata in there Jorge. You can setup dates and event specific information that will give you a new rich snippet result in Google - have a look at the Sports Events on Schema.org. This is what they are there for 
Andy
Hi Brian,
Yes, Google+ is a bit of a must if for no other reason than to share a bit of your website content and get Google seeing you on the radar more readily.
It can most definitely help your results in the SERPs. Do a search and see photos of people next to their articles / pages, and this is Google+ and Authorship at work.
Depending on how you view it, very much a necessary evil that is only going to continue to grow in importance to any SEO you plan on doing.
Something for you to try - search for "Links Google want to see" and you will see my article at the top of the page. This took less than 2 hours to start to appear in the SERPs.
Not too shabby by any standards
Andy
Simple answer is no Jason. There always has to be someone to administer it. Best not to try and setup a mule account either as these things have a habit of coming back to bite you.
Andy
But don't forget, the reason you wrote the article is to get links back from it, not to benefit people of squidoo, and because of where it's posted, Google will realise this too.
An article that would be beneficial should be posted on websites related to that industry, not to sites like squidoo & hubpages (which have both had their day).
Spend a little time researching sites that are related to this topic and you will get real benefit then.
Can't remember the last time I saw a squidoo page appear anywhere for a search term.
Andy
No problem at all.
As for a chain of redirects, this isn't how Google will see it. They even say that a redirect from one page to another is fine... it's when you get into the realms of 'page a --> page b --> page c' that it will become a problem.
A temporary redirect when used for a permanent move is a little dodgy to say the least and should be corrected. Also, what is the chance of 20 people hitting the same page at exactly the same second? And even if they do, it just means they each wait half a second rather than 22ms - I can see no problem with that whatsoever. Even at half a second, this is still very fast.
You can still cache pages through htaccess if you want - doesn't mean you have to ignore caching just because you do things the right way
Andy
I would sooner take the extra half a second to get this done correctly and as long as pages don't take like 4-5 seconds to load, then this really won't be an issue for Google. Don't forget, page speed is only one of hundreds of primary signals - content and quality are much higher up on the Google radar.
Remember, a 302 is supposed to be a temporary move. Do this the right way and don't look back
Andy
Hi Stephen,
Matt cutts recently said they don't want to see links in articles on article marketing sites. They see these as thin attempts to try and get links back to a website.
The only links they want, outside of +1's and social shares, are those that deserve a place on a website.
Article marketing is pretty much dead in the water these days, the same with footer / widget / blogroll links.
Here is a blog post and video from Matt Cutts on the subject.
Andy
What you can also do is change the search domains. So go to google.co.uk and make sure you aren't still on Google.com or Google.in - I do this a lot when testing and works really well. For example, I have one client right now in Ireland so if I want to see what they do, I change to google.ie
Andy
Incognito in Chrome all the way.
However, if you are just looking to track keywords, try something like SheerSEO or if you want more functionality, SEOmoz. Both will give you a free trial.
Andy
I think the reason you won't here a definitive answer is because there isn't one and each does have their own pros & cons.
Personally, I always go for country-specific domains where possible or folders where not. Not a fan of sub-domains myself, but I will use them in cases where the other options just won't fit with the job requirements.
However, I think you need to look at your requirements, as you have done, and see which one is going to fit your requirements the closest. Rarely is there a solution that fits all.
Andy
Hi Gregory,
Is this the only kind of instance of duplicated content? I only ask as some platforms (Wordpress, Joomla) can create duplicate pages which require a bit of work to sort out. These don't tend to be www / non-www issues though.
Andy
Completely agree with David here - your approach to link building is quite a dangerous one that might see an initial bounce, but I wouldn't expect that to last.
I wrote an article on ethical link building that might be worth a read but you should know that Google have stated that they don't want to see poor links fromArticle Marketing, so I would cease with that immediately. Especially with the spun content. If I were in your shoes, anything that has been spun and republished, I would go back over and remove.
If yours is the sort of business that can carry off a blog / news section, I would write this great content and keep it all on your own site.
Setup Authorship from your site to your Google+ page (set one up if you don't have one) and then start posting links to articles in there. Then start building a network of others who will also be interested in sharing your content. You need to get your content out as much as possible, but this has to be handled the right way.
Hope this helps.
Andy
Dana is correct - you need to ride the wave a little while Google looks at all of the changes and then recalculates where you should be.
Something else, how have you been dealing with the duplicated content? If a change in content on landing pages has happened, it could be worth using CrazyEgg and looking at a heatmap of those pages to see where people are the most active. Can be a real eye-opener!
Really need to know more about how the changes were made before we can look at other possible reasons.
Andy
Yup - I asked John Mueller from Google about this and want to know what his reply was?
Me: "Can I just ask if Google have these sorts of bot-user services on their radar?"
John: "Yes, we have abuse teams working on those kinds of elements too."
Andy
Another point here is 'don't try too hard' - you can actually knock yourself out of the SERPs by doing too much SEO, so just keep the site content fresh, unique and share it everywhere you can.
Also, don't chase highly competitive phrases - start with long tail that you have a chance of ranking for and work back from there.
Andy
I would report it if even historical data is showing a drop as that isn't normal.
Send me a link if you do so as well please
Andy
On the elft of the chart, does it show the numbers still, or has this drop been reflected there also?
Just had a look at mine Chris but not noticing anything out of the ordinary.
Have you posted anything on the Google support forums?
Andy
Might overlap a little on Billy's questions...
So you don't want the site but you want it to continue to rank so you can drive traffic to your new site? Or you just want it there so that existing people who know of the URL will go there and be re-directed?
Either way, yes, this is a doorway at some level and as such could harm your new domain if Google spot what you are trying to do.
Saying that, you take the site down, then Google will probably just stop it ranking for anything much pretty quickly anyway.
What is the main reason for wanting to do this? What is your goal?
Andy
As Marcus said, links are a big part of domain authority, but something else to try is setting up both a Google+ account (if you don't have one) and then applying authorship as well.
Having others who are influential in your niche will help build authority to your site as well, so get active on Google+ and start sharing and collaborating with others in your industry.
Andy
As you already know, duplicated content is a real problem and you want to stay away even from content that is too similar as this can also get you a penalty.
As for how it is best to develop, you have 3 options:
Where possible, I always try and opt for the first option, just simply because it really does allow you to give a larger degree of separation to country-specific websites.
But the problem, no matter which way you turn, is the same / similar content. This will get hammered by Google if it is too similar - the same goes for pages with 'thin' content that serves no real purpose.
There are so many questions with different outcomes here such as do the holding sites require the same level of SEO?
Andy
I tried to become an editor some time ago and never went anywhere - this was mainly down to the fact application mails bounced.
So they want to take news from an external source then paste it on their site?
However, rel canonical is not meant to be used like that. It is for telling Google about a preferred page to deliver within your own domain.
If they want new, they need to take it, re-write it properly and then post it.
However, they could take a headline and a short snippet and then just have the link go straight to the originating source. Still not ideal, but better than trying to host an entire copied article.
However, as Mat said, no-index or using Robots.txt to ensure content doesn't get crawled is an option. There is never any SEO benefit to this though.
Andy
So are you / they looking for help from the ground up Andrew?
As for getting links, it starts with a great service / content and finding others who are willing to link back for whatever reason.
I wrote and article on LinkBuilding as a guide, so perhaps take a quick peek there?
Andy
Move on or find one who takes bribes 
To be honest, I have had no job getting sites in there for a long time now. Plus, it isn't the authority it once was.
Andy
I would need to see this to give you any real feedback on it John but general rule of thumb is if Google looked at these links, would they see and understand the reasoning for the links to be there?
Andy
I can't really help you with the htaccess stuff John, but regarding links from the homepage to another external site, this has always been a questionable practice. Why would you want to direct someone to another site as soon as they got to your homepage? Google see this in a similar way.
However, if there is a very good reason for the link to appear there and if it formed part of a good sentence with accurate anchor text and wasn't trying to push people there just to get traffic up, then I can see no harm - bit hard to judge without seeing though.
Andy
Brad hit the nail on the head there Kristopher. Whilst you are the author, it should always be you and the image should also match this.
However, the ideal scenario is to have rel publisher on the homepage and rel author on subsequent pages on the site.
Andy
Robots.txt could be your friend here when trying to tackle duplicated content. If you Robots out folders you don't want to appear, although the page will still be there, Google wont be able to crawl it.
Andy
Honestly guys, I would setup one account for each and I wouldn't try to administer them from one account either. It could cause huge problems further down the line.
Just sent them a Google account up and manage each of them manually. Of course, have a spreadsheet at hand to track logons etc
Andy
First of all, be careful with off-site links from your homepage unless there is a very good reason for it. If there isn't, I would always no-follow it so Google doesn't see an unethical link.
With reagards what you are seeing in Majestic, when you hover over the link, what do you see? Is it just a normal HTML link or has it been completed another way?
Andy
There is probably a days-worth of discussion here James. But just looking at your links very quickly, I do see quite a few questionable ones, some odd ones, but I do notice that most have the same anchor text and appear to go to the home page.
Could be nothing at all, but something to look at. However, unless you have a links warning from Google in WMT, then it is unlikely this is the cause.
You do also seem to have a little bit of duplicate content outside of your site so presumably this is your content and someone has plagiarised it? For example, here is a random search from one page.
I honestly think there is a lot more to look at here, but something of a starter for you.
Andy
Hard to say without looking at everything in more detail Steven. Could be clutching at straws all day, but happy to have a chat in more detail if you want to get in touch.
I still suspect a penalty has happened that has knocked the .ie site off the radar.
Andy
Matt Cutts said that this is to be used if you, or another party, has ever undertaken poor link building techniques.
They do say only use it if you need to, but they aren't likely to penalise anyone for using it - they already know if you have bad links and have had a links warning.
Kerem - where you say "Also I used Disallow Tool and submitted some other spammy url's." do you mean you used the new Google Disavow tool? If so, be aware that Google said effects from this can take a number of weeks to be seen.
If this is the case, wait a while and just make sure that you aren't being penalized for anything else. For example, make sure your content isn't spread across the 'net by others who have plagiarised yours.
Andy
Hi Brett,
I don't know of any specific plans as each SEO tends to work differently, but this might be of help where looking for a list of do's & dont's.
http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/internet/google-ranking-factors.htm
SEOmoz also have a check-list you might want to look over as well:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-beginners-checklist-for-small-business-seo
Andy
If you have lots of duplicate pages, you can get hit by Panda, which tends to be a site-wide penalty.
However, I would look for ways to correct this rather than just ignore the pages as Google tells everyone not to duplicate content.
Andy
Thanks Dana - quite effective and I start all my clients' sites like this now - advantages are what we make of them now
Andy
Hi Kyu,
Remember, canonical is only a suggestion to google of which page should be delivering the content - it is still up to them what they do. In practice though, this is what many opt for.
301's are a permanent redirect and too many can suggest a poor underlying site - you wouldn't want a 301 for every page if there were a lot of them.
You could also think about Robots to remove some of the duplicated pages so they never get spidered, or just no-index them.
404's for me wouldn't be the ideal scenario because somewhere in the site, it can lead to what is basically a dead page. Too many 404's can actually harm your ranking because when Google spiders and finds them, if you have a large enough site, they could be met with 200+ dead pages!
On some sites, you are able to just remove the pages altogether, but you can't do this with the likes of Joomla.
Think about no-indexing / robots because although the pages will still be there, you are telling Google not to bother. This is the route many SEO's are taking now.
Andy
If you haven't already done so Curt, setup a Google+ account, setup authorship through your site and G+ and start sharing your content. You can find it is indexed with results much faster
I have had content in the SERPs in a matter of days using this method - days of the 'sandbox' are all but history.
Andy
OK so from 3,600 indexed pages, after typing site:www.site.ie -inallurl:www.site.ie you see 10?
That seems to suggest that a lot of pages have been dropped from the primary to supplementary index and if that's the case, it it more than likely an algorithm update that has caused this.
So just to understand, which site in WMT has the geotag set to Ireland? But to be honest, that isn't really much of a problem and wouldn't have caused a loss in traffic.
In 12 years of doing this, I have never had a dramatic site drop like you said, for a couple of weeks, only to find its own way back again.
Maybe I have just been lucky, maybe my customers have, but one thing I can say, when they have had drops of this degree, it has been down to a problem that needed fixing.
Don't forget, Google is releasing algorithm updates all the time then tells us after 2 months what they did, unless it's something like a Panda refresh which happens ever 6 weeks or so.
Hope it's noting much, but leave no stone unturned.
Andy
What do you see if you hop on Google.ie Steve? I am inclined to think that the problem is related to the fact Google has dropped the site from the SERPs for whatever reason, but always a little hard to see exactly what is going on from this end.
So you still see 3,600 pages when you do a site:?
Try this for me:
site:www.site.ie -inallurl:www.site.ie (replace domain both times with your own)
How many pages do you see then?
Hi Steve,
So just to be clear, is the .ie site hosted in Ireland or the UK? And this is the primary site with just a .co.uk pointing at it as a domain forward?
I don't think that Google would re-index the .co.uk as they know it's a forward but to err on the side of caution, remove the forward that is currently in place and concentrate on putting right any issues with with the .ie - I suspect duplication features heavily?
Andy
As suspected, it shows when you click on "more results near" and then the result you see if being pulled from your website, rather than G+ page.
Why is isn't showing on the front page I am unsure, but most I see tend not to, only when you click for more.
Andy