Nice come back.
Don't really have anything else to say, your argument won me over on the first read.
Thanks.
Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Nice come back.
Don't really have anything else to say, your argument won me over on the first read.
Thanks.
Hi,
Does semantically related words to the target term on a page help with rankings/relevance?
If your after the term 'PC Screen' and you use the term 'PC Monitor' will go make the connection and also reward you because of the relevance?
Anyone do this and have you seen any positives?
I've just started to try this out lately and have been combining it with Wordle.net to give me an indication of where the content piece is heading and how aggressive the content leans towards certain words (makes things a little more interesting then calculating densities).
Thanks,
Do you think this shortened version will allow the keyword to hold more weight?
From a quality point of view this:
Plastic Flower Pots for the house and garden with free delivery
Is more UX friendly then Plastic Flower Pots - Free Delivery!.
I know your version EGOL will work better end of, I just think my version which is written for the user (as Google always recommends) is more descriptive of the page.
Why doesn't Google head more in the direction of descriptive titles rather then shorter the better?
Nice, thanks everyone.
I'm a big fan of the 'keyword + CTA + Brand' form but sometimes it just flows over 70 chars so to be safe (unless its a big brand) dump the brand term.
One thing im trying to do is not dilute the key terms but at the same time not sound like a robot, I think this structure is a killer for CTR's - Keyword, Keyword, Keyword | Brand.
Target terms:
Flower Pots, Plastic Flower Pots (in order of importance)
Title tags:
1. Flower Pots - Plastic Flower Pots for Gardening with Free Delivery
2. Flower Pots - Plastic Flower Pots with Free Delivery
3. Flower Pots - Plastic Flower Pots from [Brand]
Which one would you choose and why?
If you want to produce another type please do but explain why you think yours is better than the above.
Thanks
Your competitors will need to pay to renew those links, you won't.
Your competitors spend $200 on a link for a year, you spend $200 on 10 quality articles.
After a year they have to renew the same link for another $200, you have the option to generate another 10 articles, either way your original 10 articles are still active.
Thanks for the reply,
It's not syndicated content, basically a hub company runs a network of websites, some have 100's of sites under them. The network also has in-house copywriters to fuel the websites but also allow for out-house copy writers to add content as well. Each out-house copywriter goes through a review process of past work, if there copywriting skills are good then gain access to the whole network or a sub-section they specialise in.
I'm guessing the network has a few dedicated servers and at least a batch sit on the same C-Block.
I understand what your saying about aiming for exposure instead of SEO benefit but I believe there are only a few blogs which will generate a better return SEO wise from the exposure then the link itself (in each niche).
Side Question: How you finding the betting industry Tom? You got restrictions going on from Google because of your industry? How do you find the difficulty of gaining links?
Cheers
Hi,
If you can get into a network as a writer it's great because you can expose your brand on high auth websites without the hassle of having to build a relationship with each site - once your in, your into all the websites on the network.
So question is, isn't this going to be bad for SEO, I assume all the websites are on the same server and I have seen some where they interlink in the network. Apart from that though they look really great, good fresh content, high DA/PA, lots of social activity etc.
A couple I have come across are:
Splash Press & Alloy Digital (If you know of any more please post them up).
Ok, so Open Site Explorer question:
Say you enter a link and filter as follows - Followed + 301, only external, this page, ungroup.
Now lets say 50 links appear from the same domain, when you visit the domain one of those Go Daddy type parked domain pages appear with lots of adsense as they usually do.
Link back... No where to be seen.
What's the score here? Is this domain showing up because OSE is yet to update for this domain?
Hi,
Say you have an article, does a link in the content itself hold more weight then including it in say the byline?
I have read so many times a link higher up the page, contextual has much more benefit than a link way below the fold separated from the main content within a byline.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
So your saying it is retained on the website?
Check it out, EGOL post para 3 - http://www.seomoz.org/q/noindex-follow-is-a-waste-of-link-juice
That's just one of the reasons why I started questioning it but I have seen it else where.
I suppose it's not really a question as I don't actually worry about it that much but I like to know so the question had to be asked.
Thanks for the reply.
Ok,
In WMT's under health > index status I have both total indexed and ever crawled ticked - It also looks like the data is broken up weekly.
As an example say you have the following:
Total Indexed: 1000
Ever Crawled: 5000
What is this say? It found 5000 pages but only indexed 1000 (20%).
Thanks
Hi,
I have read a few times, on here and other places that when a website applies a no follow tag to a link the PR is not retained but instead disappears (evaporates) thus neither website benefiting.
Is that true? If so what is the actual benefit of no following a link?