Hi Gina
I agree with Jeff's comments. If it's a good design and works well then both your current and future customers will all benefit.
Peter
Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Hi Gina
I agree with Jeff's comments. If it's a good design and works well then both your current and future customers will all benefit.
Peter
Hi Jennie
Both URLs you listed do display metrics in the Moz toolbar for me.
In terms of the value of getting a link from there yes, there could be, the most value would be a link from it is going to a page displaying a wedding venue for hire.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Arben
Google's definition of a canonical page is "the preferred version of a set of pages with highly similar content". (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139394?hl=en)
Looking at the two pages you have linked to I don't think they fall into the category of having "highly similar content".
Similar content isn't just defined as what is the same textually but also functionally. These two pages serve different user needs to find first aid courses in two different locations. To my mind that makes them different.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Roxanne
Welcome to Moz! The community rank is based on how many Moz points you have accumulated when you have interacted on Moz by responding to questions, posting on YouMoz and also updating your profile. The more Moz points you accumulate the higher your community rank is, the lower the number the higher your rank.
3238 is a good starting point but it will get even better the more you involve yourself in the Moz community!
All the best to you!
Peter
Edit: there is more info on Moz points and how you can earn them here
Hi Jennie
Yes, the consensus used to be that a link from trusted sites like .gov (that's if we can trust government websites but then that's maybe for another discussion!) increase the trust of the page it linked to. The Moz SEO guide says the same in its summary on TrustRank: Earning links from highly trusted domains can result in a significant boost to this scoring metric. Universities, government websites and non-profit organizations represent examples of high-trust domains.
That said, there was a video posted about 3 years ago by Google's Matt Cutts that suggested that links from .gov sites carry no more trust than, for example, from a .com.
I think to a larger extent the question is how relevant is the linking site? By that I mean, is the linking site an authority on the subject for the link being given?
The most important thing really is relevance. In the context of the linking web page on the Bristol City Council website, whilst that page has some authority, the Bristol City Council website is not really an authority on wedding venues and as such the value of that link is probably the same or perhaps only a little more than a similar link from another site. If you had a link from a trusted authoritative site all about weddings then because the site is more relevant, then you may find that carries more weight.
I hope that helps,
Peter
PS. This is the Matt Cutts video I referred to above: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxTmZulcQZ0 - listen to the clip around 1:45 into the video.
Hi Samuel
Is Google far to volatile for any serious business to rely on?
No, I don't think it is but I do know of one business recently who has given up chasing organic search and just invested their time and money in PPC, but then they were not listed on page 1 anyway, so it was a simpler decision for them to do that and go for quick wins with paid search.
Should you move to PPC?
If you are receiving organic click throughs then you must be ranking well for one or more keywords. Should you give that up and not bother with Google organic at all and go solely PPC? I would suggest you don't do that. Whilst, your organic rankings are not just going to disappear because you have paid not attention to your page's SEO, that is not to say other sites won't step in ahead of you.
However, if the volatility you have experienced (and screenshot 1 for August is dramatic) is hurting your revenue, then you should consider backing it up with PPC. But only of course if the cost of clicks is less than the revenue you are receiving from them, so make sure you measure.
On Adwords click through, it always has been lower than organic search results because the person viewing them doesn't give them as much trust as organic results. They are more obviously ads and so people are not so willing to click on them when other non-ad links are presented to them. It's interesting that over time Google have lightened the background colour of Adwords (to be almost invisible now) just to try to make them appear the same an increase click through.
As I am sure you know, the best way to improve click through rate though is to pay close attention to the headline and the words of the ad, but they are still unlikely to generate as much traffic as top ranking organic links.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi, sorry to hear you are having a problem with this.
It's an issue that others in the Moz Q&A forum have reported in the last day or so. From the report on http://health.moz.com/ it suggests that it's an issue that Moz's engineers are aware of and are looking to resolve:
Cannot add Google+ accounts
Our engineers are working to resolve an issue preventing Google+ accounts from being added in campaign settings. An update is expected later today so please check back for any new status! Common errors are returning: remote-authentication.failure.
I hope that helps. Just keep an eye on http://health.moz.com/ for an update.
Peter
Hello Iris
Thanks for the extra info. I understand now.
The report you refer to is in Moz Analytics. "The Top External Inbound Links from Current Index" report shows backlinks to your site sorted in page authority order. Page Authority is a Moz calculated authority metric that scores the web page as to how likely it is to rank in Google's search results. Its calculation is based on lots of varied data.
In the case of the backlink you have had from dianibeach.com, Moz has assessed that of all the backlinks pointing to your site it has the second highest page authority. If its authority score is 27 that is fairly low, but it must mean that the authority of
To answer your concerns from your earlier post:
My worry is why it is reported as second top page?? Can that be?? Moz has assessed that of all the backlinks pointing to your site it has the second highest page authority. If its authority score is 27 that is fairly low, so that suggests that the authority of other pages back linking to your site must also be fairly low.
How this can harm my site? Don't worry, It isn't going to harm your site
Can it outrank my site or whatever? The page authority is not really a mark of page ranking, just of a score of its authority to rank. If the keywords your site rank for are the same or similar to the other site, then yes it could outrank you in a specific search, but that is not what this is about. In fact, if the page is linking back to your site, then it is likely passing some of its authority back to your site.
How is it even possible that it is found in indexed search? If there is a link on another site pointing to your site then that is how it has been found by the Moz crawler.
Is there something I should be concern about? No, don't be concerned. Focus on the searches you are optimising your site and pages for and do not worry about this one site. You have a good looking site that is easy to navigate and it seems to have lots of good information and images in what looks like a beautiful part of the world. Be encouraged.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Kelley,
Welcome back to Moz and glad to hear your husband is better.
It sounds that the SEO company are spinning a yarn or two! Penguin and Panda are reasons for losing ground, but Hummingbird - at this stage! No, I don't believe that.
It's difficult to explain why your site has disappeared for so long and then to come back so quickly. Could it be that for some reason the SEO company put a robots.txt on the site that disallowed any indexing of the site other than the home page? I have seen that happen once before where the result was only a home page was indexed. It might be worth checking the date/timestamp of the robots.txt on the server to see when it was last updated.
How do you tell if the 140 + 20 sites are good or bad? Only really by going through each one checking their content and also perhaps checking them in Open Site Explorer. Target the ones you have identified already first and then begin to go through the others.
I hope that helps. All the best to you.
Peter
Thanks for including that screenshot Iris.
Regarding villasdiani.com/?db being shown as one of your top visited pages, I think (and perhaps someone from Moz will confirm this) that because you have been receiving links to your site to villasdiani.com/?db and that is probably also being recording in your Google Analytics, it considers that to be a page when it actually isn't.
As I mentioned earlier in our conversation on this, villasdiani.com and villasdiani.com/?db are actually go to the same page. They are just seen as different because you have had inbound links to villasdiani.com/?db and as said before when the query string ?db is not processed by the web server because there is not recognised, it is then ignored.
I have run a search to see what external sites/pages are linking to villasdiani.com/?db and the following were some of the results:
http://dianibeach.com/airservices/index.html
http://dianibeach.com/apartments/index.htm
http://dianibeach.com/bedbreakfast/index.htm
http://dianibeach.com/books
http://dianibeach.com/carhire
http://dianibeach.com/golf
and they are showing as all having had the anchor text of "Raul".
Is Raul the name of this guy you know who said he was giving links to your site from the footer of your site?
I have checked the source code of some of the pages above villasdiani.com/?db.
The data being reported by Moz for these type of reports is not totally up to date but taken from the last crawl they made. You said at the start of this thread that you had asked this guy to remove the links to your site. Could it be that in the last few days or so he has done that and so from now on you won't be getting any links to villasdiani.com/?db ?
That's possible, but I cannot say that is definitive, but it would explain what you have been seeing.
Maybe someone from the Moz team can throw some light on this or one of the other more knowledgeable forum members.
Peter
Hi David
First step would be to remove the link herself from those sites if she could get access. If that didn't work then at least try to contact the sites and ask them to remove the links
But if she is unsuccessful with those routes she would be to go through Google Webmaster Tools and start a process of disavowing those links one by one. This video by Google's Matt Cutts may help explain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=393nmCYFRtA
Peter
Hi Ravijot
I assume you mean the diagnostic report in Moz and not anything you have seen in Google webmaster tools?
If the Moz report, you will see the column of pages it reports as duplicated. Alongside, you will see a number in the column which is titled "Other URLs". If you click the number, it will then show you the other URLs which are returning the duplicate page.
It's likely that these URLs are all pointing to the same page rather than you actually having duplicate pages.
Hopefully that will help you to find out what is wrong and fix it, but post back if you are still stuck.
Peter
Hi Lori
A 410 code it technically correct in the context you are using it, but for SEO purposes you are better to do something with links that are going to the pages you are currently returning 410 codes for.
If you have a page that relates in some way to the page you have removed, then create a 301 redirect and send the requests to the similar page.
If no similar page exists, you could just redirect to the home page. In some cases though in those circumstances it could be worthwhile sending the link to a custom 404 page similar to the one Moz use as you can see for my invalid page query: http://moz.com/404. Rather than use a 301 redirect in those circumstances, this type of response can be a good opportunity to engage with the visitor to try to guide them to the information they are looking for. The Moz 404 page is a good example of that.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Iris
I can't help you with what you are seeing within Moz without seeing it specifically, but maybe some from support will be able to help you with that.
The ?db at the end of the web address for your site is called a query string. Typically, these are used to pass a string of text (in this case 'db') to run against a script on the site to do something as a result of receiving that string of characters. But it may be that it doesn't do anything and if, on the web server, there us nothing to process the query string, then it will be ignored. For example, if you try this http://www.bbc.co.uk/?db and this http://www.bbc.co.uk will do the same thing because there is nothing to process the ?db on the receiving web server.
You can only ask the person who created the link with the ?db to give the reason why.
I hope that helps in some way,
Peter
Hi, my recommendation would be the latter - their brand page on your website. There is more context that way and the link (which hopefully they will agree to make a "follow" link) will pass good value to your web page so that page will rank higher for that brand because of it.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi, it should work but maybe you are not adding it correctly? You just need to put in your new Google+ name with a plus sign before it, e.g. +PeterLunn without any other parts of the URL.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi, if you have Google webmaster tools then you will be able to see in there if you have suffered a penalty from Google, but if nothing has been said to you by Google that could still mean your site has suffered a Penguin slap.
I don't think a change in hosting or IP address will have as significant an impact as you describe. That said, a question re the change... do all of the page addresses on the newly hosted site have the same page addresses with your previous host? If they don't that is most likely your problem.
Without seeing your site then it's difficult to tell you more, but I hope that helps.
Peter
Changing the URL doesn't remove the link to your domain and if Google has previously identified it as a spammy link they will know from their site cache that the link previously went to another URL, so I don't think you are going to disavow your site of anything by doing that.
Is there a reason you don't want to use the Disavow tool? With only 20-30 links affected it will take no time to put them into a text file and submit them to Google.
Peter
Hi Mike
I have no experience of Attracta, but if, as you say, what they are offering "doesn't exactly sound white hat", that would worry me.
The last couple of years have seen many sites experience loss from 'not exactly white hat' link building. You can get quick climbs in keyword ranking, but if your site gets slapped it could suffer a long time in obscurity. The net result is not worth it.
But as I say, I have no experience of Attracta so my issue is not with them because what they do may be totally fine. All I would say is if in doubt be cautious.
I hope that helps,
Peter
EDIT: I suggest it is also having a look at this page which may help you to qualify what may or may not work for you: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66356?hl=en
Hi Rob
Congratulations on publishing your first website.
First comment is the site looks very clean and its navigation is very clear. Whilst content is very important for a website, the look and feel of the site needs to engage you to browse and read, which I think your site does. That is an important aspect of SEO because the more people browse and read your site the more Google will take notice and it will help to grow the authority of your website.
In terms of other optimisation of the site, you need to do it systematically and incrementally rather than take a scatter gun approach. A planned approach to what you do will help you to grow your understanding of SEO. The Moz tools are excellent for helping you do that, plus I recommend you read Moz's Beginner's Guide to SEO which will give good foundations to your learning.
One thing I would look at changing on your site is how you have structured your Title tags. All of your pages start with your site name: "The Removalists Guide" rather than what the page is about. I would reverse the order so, for example, on the Costs page the title is something like, "How much will it cost to move home? - The Removalists Guide".
Having the main words at the start helps both people and search engines to better understand what the page is about. In deciding on a Title of what the page is about, I would try to get inside the head of the person searching and what they are looking for or the question they are asking. Hence my wording for your costs page of "How much will it cost to move home?" rather than "How much will my move cost?" You need to include the word "Home" as it is important to what your whole website is about.
Similarly, with your home page, make the Title something like, "Helping you choose the right removal company" rather than "Helping you choose the right company" - the right company for what? Whilst I understand your site is about "removalists", and that is fine as your brand name, it's not a word understood necessarily by your potential customers - at least not in my part of the world (UK) it wouldn't be.
So, I hope that gives you a good starter. I am sure you will receive some great tips from others.
All the best to you,
Peter
Hi Steve
If it can only be viewed legally by health practitioners who are members of your site, then it seems to me you don't have an option as by putting any of this content into the public domain on Google by whatever method you use will be deemed illegal by whichever body oversees it.
Presumably you cannot also publish short 25o word summaries of the content?
If not, then I think you need to create pages that are directly targeted at marketing the site to health practitioners. Whilst the pages won't be able to contain the content you want to have Google index, they could still contain general information and the benefits of becoming a subscriber.
Isn't that the goal of the site anyway, i.e. to be a resource to health practitioners? So, without being able to make the content public, you have to market to them through your SEO or use some other form or indirect or direct marketing to encourage them to the site to sign up.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Adnan
To answer you firstly on Hummingbird and SEO Guru's opinion, yes, it's correct in part, but your client should not get caught up with idea that responding to Hummingbird requires a new SEO magic trick. Hummingbird is the evolution of what Google has been doing for quite a while meaning that today SEO is not so much about saying how do I target this or that keyword, but rather how you answer the questions your target customers are asking.
So whilst including keywords or phrases into a page Title tag is still relevant, it's not about top loading pages, but making sure the whole page is targeted which actually could mean, in terms of that page's content, that you are targeting multiple key phrases.
You are right in saying you shouldn't just be repeating one key phrase such as "oak furniture" across all pages. A Title tag is like the title of a page in a book. It tells the visitor and the search engine what that page is about which then of course needs to be backed up by the content on that page. So all pages on a site cannot be just about "oak furniture".
Having said that, it may be that your client's site could do with an SEO makeover and as such that may mean updating some page Titles and consequently the page URLs. If that happens, you will need to use 301 redirects to make sure old page URLs are redirected to the new page URLs.
I hope the above helps,
Peter
Hi,
Directories of themselves are not bad.
I would say that provided the directory shows a clear track record for your industry and is not just lots of pages of links with no supporting content, then that still holds good.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Some great pointers Egol. "OMG! My ring fell down the drain."... brilliant. As you say, taking an angle like that is going to make a sleepy subject much more sharable.
Peter
Hi, as mentioned in the other answer I gave here: http://moz.com/community/q/where-is-the-rule-here-that-force-www-in-urls#reply_202351
the first checks for non-inclusion of the www in the URL (the !^www checks if www is not included at the start of the URL being tested), the second checks for a URL that starts with just the domain.
Peter
Yes, that's much better. It's a lot more engaging I think.
Just a small technical issue with how the page displays in Chrome (and I would think Safari too). On all of the sets of bullet points, the first bullet point (but not the text of it) is aligned right. This is being caused by there being floats on each block of text (e.g. div, p etc) in your HTML being applied from your CSS.
Rather than going through and changing your CSS for each of the blocks, if you add just a clear:both to the ul in your CSS, that should fix it. So as follows:
ul {
clear: both;
}
Otherwise, it's all OK. Good luck to you with this.
Peter
Hi, it is just one site then I don't think it is going to have an impact on your site, especially with the links being in the footer, unless you are talking about lots of them.
If you did want to do anything then yes, just add a nofollow to the footer link. If the footer link is contained in a common block of code that is included on all the site's pages then it's a simple change to do. But there is no need to do a disavow.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi, 50-70 characters does seem quite spammy to me, but then if you watch the Image SEO Basics Whiteboard Friday by Aaron Wheeler, he says that image filename length has much the same character length as Alt Text, so on that basis the answer would be no.
It would be interesting to hear others feedback on this.
Peter
Hi
To answer your questions:
For a site that is only one to two months old, what is considered a natural amount of inbound links if you're site offers very valuable information, and you have done a marketing push to get the word out about your blog?
This is really a "How long is a piece of string" question. It depends. If the site is for an established brand launching say a new site, then inbound links during that time could escalate to 1000s or tens of thousands wouldn't be unrealistic to expect. For an unknown, who knows? In one sense, it doesn't really matter. What matters is that those inbound links are producing results, both from people clicking on them and it benefiting your site from an SEO perspective.
Even if you are receiving backlinks from authority websites with high DA, does Google get suspicious if there are too many inbound links during the first few months of a sites existence?
Again, it would depend on whether or not the new site was for an established brand or for an unknown, but suspicion isn't necessarily based on numbers - although it would be fair to say that the higher the number the more it might flag up an issue. The main thing though is that Google's algorithms are sophisticated and able to detect link quality on the basis of a number of metrics, e.g. the social profile of a site. You could just have 10 links and it could flag an issue.
I know there are some sites that blow up very fast and receive thousands of backlinks very quickly, so I'm curious to know if Google puts these kind of sites on a watchlist or something of that nature. Or is this simply a good problem to have?
As I said above, the more links accrued in short space of time, the more likely a yellow or red light might start flashing on Google's dashboard, but again it comes down to link quality which is evaluated on a number of metrics that will determine if there is an issue.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Ruben
You mentioned: In GWT, the 404s are slightly different. They are www.kempruge.com/example/www.kempruge.com
I have seen this type of thing before, or something similar, when an absolute link has been entered into some anchor text or by itself without adding http:// before the link.
So the link has been entered as www.mydomain.com - which causes the error - but it should be entered as http://www.mydomain.com
Your issue may be something completely different, but I thought I would post this as a possible solution.
Peter
Hi, I don't think there is any SEO benefit that's been proven. If you had asked the question a couple of years or so ago, the answer would have been make sure you use nofollow on your links.
But the web is changing and Google is rewarding authenticity in what you do online.
If you were to write a technical article in a magazine for example, you would typically cite anyone you referenced in your article to give them credit for the piece you referred to. So, if you write a blog post for your site, why shouldn't you do the same? It seems normal and authentic to do that and if you are going to credit them, why wrap a nofollow around it?
Technically, you are passing SEO value from your page to theirs and diluting your own page's SEO value. But I don't know now if Google sees it and treats it that way.
So, that may not have answered your question but it may give something to discuss further.
Peter
Hi
I would think that renting a Regus office address is no different to renting office space in any serviced office location.
It will always take a bit of time to establish a new address/location and be able to SEO around it, but name, address, phone number (with the local code prefix) on the site page(s) is an definite requirement.
Provided your client is not going to be there for a short time then I would back that up by growing citations of their office so that all "signposts" so to speak point to their legitimate office location.
Rand Fishkin spoke on this subject in a Whiteboard Friday back in May. You can watch it here: <a title="http://moz.com/blog/discovering-local-citation-opportunities-whiteboard-friday">Discovering Local Citation Opportunities - Whiteboard Friday</a>
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi
How many pages are being measured on your site? An average site bounce rate of 36% is good but it is only an average. You really need to look at individual page bounce rates to see where issues may be occurring.
That you say the vast majority of pages are seeing visit duration of 0-10 seconds and page depth of 1 would suggest you may have a small number of high performing pages, but many are under performing.
For a low page count that could correlate to a low average bounce rate, but as I say to really need to measure page performance at a page level rather than a site level.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Zulfiqar
Yes, it could rank. Just because a site doesn't have external links it doesn't mean it won't rank. The critical factor is the site content and whether or not that content is relevant and useful to the people looking for that content. If it is Google will list pages from it in their search results.
That said, with a site that has good relevant and useful content it's really a circular thing and without external links (i.e. votes that confer authority), a site can only rank so far.
By that I mean, if a site has good relevant and unique content it will appear in searches and because it has good relevant and unique content, people will share and link to it. That will give more authority to the site and so it will appear higher in search results. If it appears higher in search results, more people will visit and share and link to it and so it goes on...
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Stephane,
If it's not something as you have said that you have solicited, then yes I would disavow it.
Peter
That's a great illustration Jeff.
Peter
Hi Gavo, yes they will to an extent because some of the link value passed to your home page will be shared through the internal links you have on your home page (e.g. via menu navigation) to other pages on your site.
A word of caution though, which you may already be aware of, to be careful when gathering links to your site that they are from good quality sites with relevance to your site. Directory sites and blogs can be prone to being 'thin' in quality and can, if they themselves are seen as spammy sites, not help your site if you are receiving links from them.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Yes I agree with Chris. There are thousands of sites with duplicate page Titles. They would be typically be sites which have not been optimised at all where the company service and company name are duplicated on every page as a default setting.
I doubt whether Google pays attention to that in terms of the site trying to manipulate search results. If anything they are undermining the search performance of their site themselves by making it harder for search engines to understand the focus of each page. That an SEO company advised them to do this is the most surprising.
Peter
Hi Aaron
With the way search has been changing it's difficult to say 'this' is comparable to 'that'.
I assume you are already blogging on the eCommerce site and creating good quality content there? If not, then I would recommend starting with that and I certainly wouldn't recommend paying to guest blog. In fact it raises the question how can a guest blog be a "guest blog" if you pay for the privilege. Sounds more like a paid link which I wouldn't recommend.
If you have expertise in an area to share and blogs in your space value that expertise then they will offer you the opportunity.
Peter
Yes, very odd that an SEO agency should do this.
It's a dumb tactic, but I doubt it would confer a penalty. More like downgrade the quality of the page and cause it to drop but I would be surprised if this alone would be responsible for the site you mention to suffer a dramatic fall in traffic.
If, as you say, the SEO agency was responsible for doing this, then it's likely that the same agency would have also been responsible for other dumb to verging on spammy tactics on this site with the cumulative result being a significant drop.
Peter
Hi, my thoughts on this page is that for me I don't read it as a blog post as it's promotional and not really informational.
You are right to look to write high quality, helpful and useful content. To do that you need to ask what questions would potential customers in your target market being asking.
You are right when you say in the page you linked to "Storage challenges are common to everyone from businesses to consumers.", so consider what hints and tips and good information can you give to help people with those storage challenges.
You cannot just say buy our storage bins, but you could post something like "101 Cool Ways to use a Dividable Grid Container" or maybe share helpful information on the best way to store important documents and the advantages of using a proper container than a cardboard box.
I hope that helps,
Peter
That's a great detailed answer Paul!
Peter
Hi, there are a couple of issues here.
I could find no reference to the company "ConvertMedia" being called "Convert Media". It's a small difference I know, but it's enough to make a difference. Google is able to split words and understand where one word is made up of two, but because these two words as you say refer to a different service, then that is the main cause of the problem.
Google's mission is to return relevant results to the person searching and to do that it tries to fully understand (as much as their current algorithm is able) the **intent **of the search. If someone types in "Convert Media", Google will understand that the person wants to be able to convert some media.
The fact that there are a lot of services that offer that means there is a lot of pages Google can return for that search and as such, it makes providing a result for "ConvertMedia" much less likely unless you have a prominent brand. For example, "hoover" has become a generic name for vacuum cleaners, but if you search for "hoover machine" the hoover.com website is displayed top.
If however, you search for "convert media performance advertising" then that search shows a different intent by the searcher and the ConvertMedia website is returned in the search results.
It's a tricky one, but I would first do some analysis to check where exactly ConvertMedia do rank for "convert media" as that will give you an indication as to how far you need to climb to reach page one. I suspect it will be a fair distance.
The other thing you could do is produce a page on the ConvertMedia site that says something candidly about ConvertMedia does not "convert media", but can be mistaken for that service. Having said that, I wouldn't necessarily recommend that because I think it undermines your brand which is exactly what you want to grow and be known for performance advertising.
I am not sure the above helps much but I hope it explains the challenge you face is ranking better for "convert media".
Peter
Then I think you will see a recovery and possible improvement, but check through Paul's suggestions.
Peter
Hi Mariano
Congratulations on landing this job.
I had a browse of the site. One thing that I think would help with regard to the actual property pages is to improve the Title tags on them which, from what I have seen, seem to be automatically populated with the address of the property, but that is all. For example this one:
http://www.aldodavico.com/info/property/residential/A1858022/
It would be better I think if it actually said the type of property that was for sale, i.e. Penthouse and an abbreviated address, e.g. South Beach, Miami and then maybe the Zip code to close so you make sure the Title is unique.
So, with this example the Title could be something like: "Penthouse for sale, South Beach, Miami 33139".
The URLs could be a whole lot better as well... /A1858022 doesn't tell human or search engine anything that may be useful either to click or to rank higher.
I realise though that you may be subject to the limits of the CMS you are using and its automation on Title tags and URLs, but if you could tweak these then it would help you.
All the best,
Peter
Hi, I don't think there is any reason not to and gives further opportunity to 'like you'
Peter
Hi Luke
You don't need to as essentially the 301 redirects you put in place will address that. So, for example, where you have had duplicate content pages you can redirect both old pages to one new page on the new site.
I hope that helps,
Peter
Hi Ron
It looks OK. However, you might find http://browsersize.googlelabs.com/ more useful though with details of how to use it here: http://browsersize.googlelabs.com/static/about-browser-size.html
Google said it was going to be retired in June last year but it's still going, probably because people do find it useful.
I hope that helps,
Peter