It would appear that you have more of a problem with your navigation then duplicate content. However that's not to say I would not remove http://www.discountstickerprinting.co.uk/#tabThree

I would simply make sure that the link is rewritten as well as pointing to a true price page instead of what sending people to now.

Is the site still under development?

I would either higher a developer to correct it or go to team treehouse to learn HTML and correct it yourself.

The best of luck to you,

Thomas

PS you have a decent thing going with your links already and you are not in a bad spot for page rank.

| Page Authority (PA) | 53 | Domain Authority (DA) | -- | 46 |
| MozRank (mR) | 5.94 | Domain MozRank (DmR) | 4.81 | 4.72 |
| MozTrust (mT) | 5.83 | Domain MozTrust (DmT) | 4.51 | 4.30 |
| Total Links | 1,635 | Total Links | 15,333 | 52,916 |
| External Followed Links | 1,589 | External Followed Links | 10,939 | 12,132 |
| Internal Followed Links | 39 | Linking Root Domains | 566 | 701 |
| Linking Root Domains | 399

|

I would not jeopardize you have that's my $.02.

301 redirecting is not bad at all in itself.

It is simply a method of redirecting links. However because of the quantity of exact match sites I believe you can only put yourself in danger Google is getting and more aggressive every day I would rather sleep soundly if I were you or myself obviously. And not redirect possibly spamish websites to my main site where I do business.

If this was not regarding 500 duplicate sites I would say go for it

unfortunately I believe that you will open yourself up for a possible penalty from Google.

The immense amount of duplicate or identical content that I don't know if you use Google Webmaster tools am assuming that you do but do have it set up for all 500 websites?

That will tell you if you have a penalty.

My thinking on this is you created a bunch of identical websites 500 of them. Whenever you make large changes to a website Google reevaluates it looks at it.

In my opinion by 301 redirecting 500 sites page 2 page or even to homepage you're just asking for a possible Extremely bad penalty or you might get away with it I don't know but if it were me I would not do it.

The real question is what is the chief site worth?

would you be okay with it being penalized because you 301 redirected all of the sites?

if the answer is this is a valuable website to me I would not risk it.

The problem is you did something that is very far into the black hat arena I'm not judging however you want to show Google you're not going to continue to try to take advantage of any part of the search engine in order to gain rank when the parts that your talking about our exact match duplicate content that you created.

I honestly would kill the content on the sites than 302 redirect them if you want to have the traffic from the links.

What you said about a 301 is pretty much where the money however you're going to open yourself up to a possible penalty or even removal from Google's index which is what happens with most penalties.

It's up to you however I would not do it.

Best of luck to you,

Thomas

I agree with Alex on a lot of it

however 500 of the same website with identical content is extremely black hat

it would depend on how much traffic is coming from these domains? Which one of them is performing the best? There must surely be a standout hopefully if it's not a lot of traffic I would delete the content on the other domains and pray that Google is not going to penalize you. By 301 redirecting any of those sites to your current chief site used and only to lose quite a bit from Google this is something that will happen if you are using the same hosting providers or not they will consider this less than good

Kane,

I could not agree with you more. For instance I have a client that currently has 26,000 visitors a day because of a awesome campaign that went viral could not be happier. One page that contains the news story receives 10,000 visitors. While the homepage might get much of the direct traffic from all the news sources online there is a call to action to view the specialty item. Sorry I can't get more into it.

Either way we just picked up traffic immensely and because of the amount of social sharing along with the incredible link velocity being pushed to the homepage and the item page only granite the item page is starting to get more links and the shares are beyond what the home page is by tens of thousands.

What I'm getting at is because of the links and the social aspect the fact that this keeps snowballing is something I'm extremely proud of.

We are going to be on the largest news network morning show next week and I anticipate this is just the beginning of the attention focused on just to pages 1 being the home.

So obviously I know you are right the more links and social shares the better the page will rank I could write gobbledygook is the title and it would still Get insane traffic.

I hope that helps,

Thomas

The only thing I can think of is Google is showing you what it last indexed and that does sound strange. However there is a other way to put your address on schema properly and quickly so you'll get the local search results you want.

Use this tool http://www.feedthebot.com/tools/address/

it's 100% free and has a lot of extra tools connected that are great

You can also utilize

http://schema-creator.org/

If you prefer to use micro data which is almost the same thing as schema you can use this tool.

http://www.microdatagenerator.com/

However I have been told not to mix the two causes some issues with search engines. So take schema or micro data is what I have recently been told I have been trying to get a solid confirmation so I think it's a possibility that it would make sense but don't want to tell you something that is not true.

My $.02 use the 1st tool and it will do the job just fine.

It is in the form of a Word press plug-in but also gives you the ability to create schema correctly right on the site and paste it into your code.

The nice thing about it is there's a little box to the right that gives you a exact match of what it's going to look like on your site.

If you don't want it to look like it formatted anything I would use the 1st tool. However both of them are excellent.

One last thing if you're using WordPress consider Yoast Local SEO it seems expensive but does a fantastic job

More great sources of information

http://www.searchenginejournal.com/how-to-use-schema-markup-for-local-seo/

http://searchengineland.com/13-semantic-markup-tips-for-2013-a-local-seo-checklist-143708

Sincerely,

Thomas

great information here guys.

Phil some of the info you have put out has been extremely helpful. We a client whose video producer published the video to Vimeo plus ( I know Vimeo Pro is much different) and subsequently has created the 3rd strongest listing for their name. Even though the video has been removed from Vimeo for 2 months it still ranks very high. What I've taken away from this is make sure whoever you're working with is using a business-class video hosting platform and does not publish work to something like Vimeo a service I feel is equal to YouTube in many ways ( aside from their Pro feature which will allow somebody to host a video appropriately.)

Thanks for all the info,

Thomas

Hi

http://www.ddosattacks.biz/

http://www.neustar.biz/enterprise/ddos-protection

https://www.verisigninc.com/en_US/forms/ddosattackservice.xhtml

https://www.verisigninc.com/en_US/products-and-services/network-intelligence-availability/ddos/index.xhtml

http://www.incapsula.com/ddos/anti-ddos-protection

What can happen

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/ddos-attack-on-ultradns-affects-amazon-com-salesforce-com-petco-com/15601

If you want a true built for enterprise host that actually has a perfect record and will care more than any other that I know of about security, up time and would you benefit yes you would fire host is the best they offer built-in DoS/DDoS mitigation

Use http://www.firehost.com/

2 answer your question about cloud flair I do not feel adding them will give you the same advantages as a enterprise level hosting company.

For instance I believe fire host to be the best let's say you think liquid Web managed dedicated with layer 7 DDoS protection is better.

Well that's up to you and me to make our decisions. Based on past history and our own opinions of the companies.

If you where to add CloudFlare

you would receive CloudFlare layer 7 DDoS protection only once you started paying $200 a month of free cloud for a service is not a system that will protect you against an attack

http://www.cloudflare.com/features-security

There content delivery network as they call it is simply a reverse proxy it's not what other people would call a true CDN once again the issues would be a large with the base plan http://www.cloudflare.com/features-cdn

Your so-called anti-cast DNS CloudFlare says is standard changes your IP address by definition any cast and DNS does not change your IP. There are some methods two get around this but it's not simple.

A $200 a month "CloudFlare Railgun origin network optimizer"

http://www.cloudflare.com/railgun

Will do the same thing as any high end content delivery network as far as fixing the front end code edge cast will do that as will NetDNA, Akamai, numerous others so may I can't list them all.

Information on Akamai stopping attacks

http://www.akamai.com/html/awe/login.html?campaign_id=F-MC-14612&gclid=CMuZzLmju7kCFcFj7AodAXYA2A&curl=/dl/whitepapers/Akamai_Cloud_Based_Security.pdf

The unique thing is edge cast is very fast so is Akamai you can purchase a Akamai CDN from liquid Web for $120 a month with a terabyte of bandwidth that's a lot.

It will do more than the CloudFlare Railgun including help stop DDoS attacks it will do it faster and if were to spend the money on a liquid Web VPS with DDoS you would be at about $175 a month or you could start off on the base package with fire host and that would cost you $200 a month however for a month $250 you can  you can add edge casts outstanding content delivery network

I have accounts with liquid Web and fire host I use fire host primarily and really do not do much with liquid Web however both of them are better than CloudFlare in terms of protection and in terms of speed.

http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-news/cn-domain-service-restored-following-massive-ddos-attack

I of course have tried to use CloudFlare and found it worthless to me.

My main point is for $200 a month you can get a much faster and safer setup.

The other thing to remember when CloudFlare said it blocked a 300 GB attack that is considered fictitious and debatable by many in the

industry myself included. I don't think switches that At 10 Gb can do that when there's only two pointing at it

Here is a link from cloud flair talking about how good of a job they did saving the Internet and stopping the biggest attack ever. They did not succeed in keeping Spamhaus online so they did not stop the attack in my opinion.

http://blog.cloudflare.com/the-ddos-that-almost-broke-the-internet

"On Monday, March 18, 2013 Spamhaus contacted CloudFlare regarding an attack they were seeing against their website spamhaus.org. They signed up for CloudFlare and we quickly mitigated the attack." & said there was "more then than 300Gbps of attack traffic"

The other big difference between CF and everyone else is they utilize there any cast network to accept the attack this slows down any one on that network instantly as it did when "the attack that almost broke the Internet happened"

Instead of moving the traffic to a private cloud and dealing with it so it would not affect others using their service they basically did not have any regard for their users at that time.

"The attackers were quiet for a day. Then, on March 22 at 18:00 UTC, the attack resumed, peaking at 120Gbps of traffic hitting our network. As we discussed in the previous blog post, CloudFlare uses Anycast technology which spreads the load of a distributed attack across all our data centers. This allowed us to mitigate the attack without it affecting Spamhaus or any of our other customers. The attackers ceased their attack against the Spamhaus website four hours after it started."

CloudFlare actually spread the attack on to their own customers this is something that harmed everyone using their service that day for I believe five days total.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2013/03/28/spamhaus_mega_ddos_little_collateral_damage/

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1065748

Nearly half of DDoS attacks in the first half of 2013 are now larger than 1Gbps, up from 13.5 percent in 2012,

http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-news/prolexic-stops-massive-dns-reflection-attack

largest DNS reflection attack ever recorded,” which peaked at 167Gbps.

If this is now the largest what was the 300gbps?

It is not bad for SEO in itself however using a CAPTCHA page if it thinks your visitors is a attack or bot is very bad & happens allot I know changing your IP address can cause some issues. What I'm getting at is if you want the type of protection you were talking about there are much better methods of going about getting it.

Try them out see what you think you can really only learn more about it.

I hope this helps you,

Thomas

Yes Google could easily understand that and I agree with you quite a bit I think some of the stuff that's coming down the pipe in the next few years will be complete game changers and nothing we could expect not everything but they'll be some things that no one expected of course.

I think Google is going to get more and more personal the fact they use Gmail, android phones Google is an ISP now there kind of a monopoly taken over but we have to live with them.

But Do not jump the gun didn't think that anything you think is possible is going to work to get you ranked right now follow their rules. Until they change.

I think your predictions are correct.
Sincerely,
Thomas