Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi,

I find my e-commerce pharmacy website is full of little snippets of duplicate content.

In particular:

-delivery info widget repeated on all the product pages

-product category information repeated product pages (e.g. all medicines belonging to a certain category of medicines have identical side effects and I also include a generic snippet of the condition the medicine treats)

Do you think it will harm my rankings to do this?

This seems unnecessarily restrictive! I had to spend 5 minutes trawling through a user's website only to find he didn't have a personal contact email rather just a company email address.

I then had to contact him on LinkedIn.

Why on earth can't I just private message him if I am a Pro subscriber?!

Another thing which is weird:

If I google "site:medexpress.co.uk" the page /clinics/erectile-dysfunction/viagra appears.

If I google "site:medexpress.co.uk viagra" that page no longer appears!

I could see why my page would have maybe dropped in the rankings but to go from a rank of around 30-70 for most of the keywords for this page to dropping off the index points to something more extraordinary. Its been like this for almost two weeks and I'm considering maybe changing the URL (as I mentioned other long-tail optimized blog pages are now starting to rank so it appears to be just this page).

Is it possible this page has been moved to the supplemental index for some reason?

Hi,

The domain actually has plenty of links and that page has two very high quality backlinks. The Moz tool for some reason is missing almost all the backlinks. If you use AHREFS it works much better (remembering to use www as the prefix for the domain).

The domain authority is 49 which is much higher than the bulk of sites on there and higher than the site in position number #1 which has somehow managed to rank with almost no backlinks (it has less than 20) or any quality content.

Whats even weirded I added a page to my other site www.centraltravelclinic.co.uk and it now outranks my main site even though it has less backlinks/relevant content.

There is even a page in my blog section which is now ranking as well.

I'm not sure but it seems as if there is some penalty against this one page...or something has gone wrong on the search index and it has been temporarily removed for whatever reason.

Regards,

Dwayne

"Large pictures tend to be bad for user experience."

I disagree. I think what you mean is slower loading is bad for the user experience. Higher quality pictures are better for the user experience.

I've been looking into deferring loading of the additional slider images. That should definitely improve load time as all the bandwidth can be used to download the first slider image.

Also the first slider image if you use a progressive format should show something quickly and then improve over time.

Why does Moz only let you send 2 private messages a day? I'm a Moz Pro subscriber!

Sorry Message Not Sent

You are currently over your quota of 2 threads per day.

Hi,

Could anyone recommend a very good conversion rate optimization expert that can:

-redesign existing landing pages using responsive twitter bootstrap

-split test using optimizely or other tool

Thanks,

Dwayne

Hi,

Its not that small a change...the size of each image will quadruple from around 10kb to 40kb. As there are three images thats 90kb more data. Which is around 20% of the total page size.

That's interesting what you mention about the first byte load time. I would have thought that was overly simple and would definitely have assumed Google would actually be more concerned with how long it takes for the page "to load" (e.g. using their pagespeed metrics).

I've optimized my site extensively and have pagespeed score of 95% and I use the amazon AWS servers.

I agree with your idea about doing what's right for my users. But if Google includes the image load time then my site will rank poorly and then I won't have any users!

In summary, I think what this question really comes down to is how does Google calculate page load times and does this include image load time and does it include load time for all images (even ones which aren't being rendered in the slider).

Thanks,

Dwayne

I have an ecommerce website and have a product slider with 3 images.

Currently, I serve them at the native size when viewed on a desktop browser (374x374).

I would like to serve them using retina image quality (748px).

However how will this affect my ranking due to load time?

Does Google take into account image load times even though these are done asynchronously? Also as its a slider, its only the first image which needs to load. Do the other images contribute at all to the page load time?

I'm not sure google would penalize you for this.

After all, it would be very easy to buy likes for a competitor site and damage their rankings if this was the case.

I have an ecommerce website and have a product slider with 3 images.

Currently, I serve them at the native size when viewed on a desktop browser (374x374).

I would like to serve them using retina image quality (748px).

However how will this affect my ranking due to load time?

Does Google take into account image load times even though these are done asynchronously? Also as its a slider, its only the first image which needs to load. Do the other images contribute at all to the page load time?

I know someone that bought likes for their facebook page for an ecommerce site. What I can tell you is that they really regretted the decision.

1. The effect on conversion rate is absolutely tiny.
2. It ruins any metrics when you start doing social marketing. You won't be able tell which posts are engaging your customers etc.
3. You won't be able to remove the likes from your facebook page easily so think carefully before you buy a large number of likes whether its really worth it. IMO, it's not.

Actually why don't you run a conversion test and see what the effect is?

Setup a new facebook page. Buy yourself a bunch of likes.

Split test the pages with and without the fake facebook page.