Welcome to the Q&A Forum

This article explains "search visibility" and has a section on how it is calculated...

https://moz.com/blog/mobile-rankings-search-visibility-moz-analytics

Some people write content that explains how to select the product, how to maintain it, demonstrations of how to use it.  These are great for attracting links.  DIY sites are the best examples of this type of content.  These article pages, if done well, can attract links, pull traffic, and ads on those pages send visitors to your sales pages.  Or, you can offer items for sale on these pages and those sales will come after your content has inspired the person to buy.

After you are finished reading the Moz Guide to Linkbuilding that Jordan suggests, I would do a content audit to determine if you have valuable content assets that can be marketed as "important things for other webmasters to link to".  If you have these kinds of assets then you have a chance at attracting good, editorially-given links.  If you don't have these kinds of assets then you are entering an area of simply "building links" that are not supported by valuable assets on your website.  That type of linkbuilding is very different because it will either be paid links, traded links, dropped links or other types of links that Google will classify as linkspam and slap you with a Penguin problem or an unnatural link penalty.

If you had a small niche site with incredible potential and you had key articles that could support that site on your main site, you could move them to the niche site and redirect the URLs.   Or, you could publish them on both sites and use rel=canonical to give the indexing and ranking value to the niche site, while still displaying that content on the main site.

I would only do the above if the amount of content is small compared to the size of the main site.

I believe that the value of one large site would be much higher than a medium size site accompanied by a bunch of hotdog stands.

I'd put the work of these hotdog stands into the main site.  The best time to produce secondary sites is after your main site crushes its niche market.

It used to get a fair amount of organic traffic a few years ago to generate around 30 leads a day, and back then that was from just one keyword.

A lot of people are seeing a strong decline of the amount of traffic that they get from the organic SERPs over the past few years.

In that time Google started adding image results and news results in informational SERPs.  In the transactional SERPs they now place up to four paid ads at the top of the SERPs and often have shopping results within, above, or beside the SERPs.  And in local results they now have maps and local listings.

Google is becoming a better webmaster and is trying to make more money from their SERPs.  Shareholders want growth and the folks at Google know that the best way to do that is to make more money from current traffic.  So they go heavier on the ads, in stronger positions and push the organic rankings down the page.

Google isn't the only ones working. Most of our competitors have become experts and writing more effective Adwords ads and more effective at converting visitors into customers.  That is also taking the sales from above the organic rankings.  Over that time, if a webmaster has not upped his game in earning clicks and converting visitors and becoming a much more competitive and aggressive seller then his sales have fallen dramatically.

Plenty of webmasters have worked really hard the past ten years and have not made massive big gains in their sales.  That's because their competitors are spending billions, google is skimming the best traffic, and everyone on the web has become a lot smarter.  So if those hard-working webmasters have held even in their revenue and profits that is the equivalent of being an awesomeasskicker of the past.

The rankings in Google image search move up and down constantly in response to new images entering the competition and rankings adjustments for historic images.

To really determine what is happening you need to look at which images were bringing you traffic before the traffic loss and which of those images have lost traffic.  You can then go to the image SERPs and see how they rank today.

I believe that image optimization is a factor, but I mainly believe that visitor engagement is more important to the rankings of the images.  Those that are clicked and viewed a lot are promoted over those that are not.  There is not much that you can do about that exept produce more popular images.

If your image traffic has taken a massive loss it could be a result of infringement.  Spammers grab lots of popular images and place them on their site, hoping that they do well in the image search results and pull in traffic.  When they do that the traffic of the copyright owner tanks and the traffic of the infringer goes up.  Then if the copyright owner polices the image SERPs and files DMCA complaints, google will remove the images that are complained about and the traffic of the site hosting them will fall.  We file more DMCA complaints to image search than to any other type of search - and Google usually responds to them quickly.

I don't use a content distribution service for any of my sites.   We simply post content and our visitors do the sharing for us.

The most instructive thing that you can do, since you have a nice body of content already on the site, is to look at that content to identify patterns of the types of articles and topics of articles that pull the most traffic, generate the most shares, accumulat the most links. This information is extremely valuable for informing future content development.

If this company is posting five blog posts per week they are either posting "quick stuff" or they have a lot of people writing for them.  If they have a lot of people writing then look at which of those people are producing the valuable work.  Give them a raise, have them work more hours.  Those that are not producing valuable content can be given different work or not engaged in the future.

My "quick stuff" usually doesn't go anywhere.  "Quick stuff" might not be substantive enough, compelling enough or valuable enough or whatever enough to be shared or linked or liked by visitors.  Out of all of the content on my site a small number of things are rocket fuel, most is pedestrian and some is simply dead wood.  None of that was quick stuff, it is all substantive stuff that we produce and learn from.  Learn what the rocket fuel is made of and make more.  Or, improve the pedestrian to make it stronger.

If you make rocket fuel you generally don't need a content distribution service.... and if you are making quick stuff or dead wood you don't need a content distribution service for that either... instead you need a magician.

Keep in mind that infringers post images on their website without any references to licenses.  They stole the images, why would they point to a license ? !!

Many of the "free image sources" on the web contain a significant number of infringing images.   Furthermore, many of the websites that sell or license images are offering images that they have no right to offer.  I have found my own images on such sites and have done something about it.

On many of the free image websites and some of the websites selling images the images are uploaded by "members".  The owners of these sites simply claim "safe harbor" when infringing images are found on their sites.  They simply blame the member and take the images down when someone complains.

I am not an attorney, but I can say that I would not use your proposed method because a lot of the images that you think are OK are not OK.   Furthermore, the images to which I hold copyright do not have licensing information posted with them because they are not available for license by anyone at any price.  They are for my exclusive use.

People who are serious about protecting their images from infringement will probably do at least two of the following if they see their images on your website.... DMCA to search engines, DMCA to hosting services, complaint to Adsense, complaint to other revenue sources, send informal notice to you, demand payment for your past use, add your website to the list that their legal team will look into.

It might be a good idea to make an appointment with an intellectual property attorney and discuss the concepts of copyrights, permissions, licenses, documentation, fair use, safe harbor and how copyright laws vary outside of your home country.  I have had these types of meetings with more than one attorney and found that it is not as expensive as you might fear.  After that meeting you have a person who knows you and can be a quick source of assistance if needed.  Time and money well spent.

The person who owns ExampleSite.com.br is smart.  They know that some of their visitors have been typing ExampleSite.com into the address window of their browser by habit instead of ExampleSite.com.br.   They also know that ExampleSite.com is easier than ExampleSite.com.br.

They have probably used a 301 redirect of ExampleSite.com to ExampleSite.com.br so that any links that go to ExampleSite.com are credited to ExampleSite.com.br.

If this was my site, I might have redirected ExampleSite.com.br to ExampleSite.com, because it is the easier of the two, but maybe the owner enjoys the .br and feels that it makes the site more appealing to the visitors.

Google might consider this to be a "link scheme"....

One part of their definition of a link scheme is.... "Widely distributed links in the footers or templates of various sites..."     You can read their full document on link schemes here... https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66356?hl=en

If the "seals" have a link in them with nofollow then they will not be considered to be manipulative.

The format, page or blog post, does not make a difference.  A blog post and a page are actually equivalent.   However, what makes the difference is how those posts and pages are optimized and built into the linkage and navigational structure of your website.

Blog posts are often separately categorized and poorly linked into the overall structure of your website and poorly optimized.  This is because they are done using a one-size-fits-all template and linkage structure. But people like them because they make it easy to generate a unit of content (page) on your website.

On the other hand, pages are often linked into the main categories of your website, given breadcrumbs that incorporate the navigational structure of your website, and can be perfectly optimized like finely-crafted arrows.

So, the answer depends upon how well your blog is organized and optimized and how that compares to your pages.

If your freelancers obtained "royalty free" images then they will likely have a receipt proving that they paid a fee for each image that was granted a royalty free license.  If they obtained other forms of license or permission they should have that neatly logged in a spreadsheet or in the form of email messages.  That is where I would start with this.

If you don't have any documentation then it is going to be really hard and really costly to go backwards to determine where each image came from and if proper permissions and licenses were obtained.  That might cost more than doing the work over again.  If I was in this situation, I would start over on this project.

If you are getting into the business of using the images of others then a good education in copyright, fair use, licensing, permissions, and proper documentation is essential.  In addition to you having this information and knowledge, anyone who works for you must have it because the problems of infringement will be yours and not theirs.  Lots of people run wild and rampant when collecting images for their websites or client websites.  They simply don't understand copyright law or the problem with ignorance.

Will people get in touch with you before filing a DMCA or filing a copyright infringement lawsuit?   They might or they might not.  If they think that your website is run by scofflaw organization with few assets then they will probably just file DMCAs with search engines and hosting companies.  They might also file complaints to Adsense and other income sources.  Successful DMCA and Adsense complaints will put the infringer out of business.  I make lots of these complaints against infringers and have a system in place to do them quickly and efficiently.

If your website appears to be run by a substantive company and the person who's images you infringed is a decent and patient, they might send you an informal infringement notice, give you a chance to fix it, and then file DMCA and income source complaints if you don't respond quickly.  Or, they might send you a bill for your past use of the image and a license agreement for use of the image going forward.   If you have stolen a lot of their images or you have a person who stands firmly on their intellectual property, they could go straight to a lawsuit or other legal remedy.

The owner of the images enjoys the ability to chose their methods of dealing with you.

"I guess it would be logical to filter only Non-Branded keywords, right?"

That is a good idea.   I keep mine in a separate campaign at semrush.

I really like visibility metrics because they are a single number that summarizes my competitive standing for a large number of keywords.

Are visibility metrics skewed?  Absolutely.  They are skewed because we select the keywords - the boundaries of comparison.

If we pick a large number of keywords that are representative of the industry area in which we compete, then that might not be extremely skewed.  However, since we define the basket of keywords ourselves, then we skew the metric in proportion to the keywords that we include that are specialties of our business.

I think that you should monitor the branded keywords of your business.  Knowing what's happening there can tip you off to health problems of your own website or people who might be infringing upon your intellectual property.

You are asking if Method A is better than Method B.  I am willing to bet that the implementation is more important than the method.

So, I would do some of each and keep track of what does best.  Every situation is going to be unique and the more varied the stuff that you throw at the wall the greater your chance of seeing something big stick.

"Google declared the max number as 100 internal links."

This is old information.

"Avoid Too Many Internal Links" error from Moz "

I think that Moz needs to rethink this, though I know a lot of people will disagree with me... but I am willing to bet big on myself.

Our first priority is to write content that answers the questions that our customers are asking.  This is usually easy because we tell this information by phone and by email everyday.

The next priority is to write content that explains how to use a product, how to fix it, how to select it.  These articles can take a couple days for the author to research and write.  A second person will be working on images or photos or data to illustrate the article.  The people who enter the site through these article page often purchase consumable supplies, replacement parts or the primary item described in the article.

Although the cost of these articles are very high, they are usually evergreen and can be on your site attracting traffic and referring sales for a long time.  But these are the articles that give your site a reputation for being a great source of content and a trusted place to do business.  They are not "quick wins".

They are long term investments.  Most business owners would balk if they saw how much time can go into the articles and the average weekly sales.  They got to consider that there are 52 weeks in a year and the article will produce its results over time.

**Content isn't king, the User is. **

Nice!  This is the first time I have seen this type of statement, yet it is so obvious.  Content that doesn't meet the mark is a waste of your money and ignored by the visitor.

At our office a little under 50% of staff time is spent on customer service and filling the order.  A little over 50% of staff time is spent making the content.  A lot of businesses that can't get traction think that 10% or even 5% spent on content is out of balance.

Management at too many businesses don't realize that they are in a competitive environment where there are only ten positions on the first page of Google and only about the top three get viable traffic after Google slaps four ads at the top and eight shopping results on the right.

** I was just curious if anyone knew if the duplicate content would suppress traffic for locations that aren't in the same city.**

If Google sees pages on your site that are substantially duplicate.  It will filter all but one of them from the SERPs.

** is it even possible to re-write the same 750 word service page "uniquely" 250 times? Ha.**

Yes.  The reward is enormous.  Ha.

I would not do this if the product is not currently on Amazon.

Everybody loves Amazon and many people go there to compare prices before making any purchase.  If your product is sold on Amazon, then the Amazon.com website will become your organic competitor.  They are really hard to beat.  Really hard.  Heavyweight sites have trouble beating Amazon.

If your product is available on your site and on amazon, and because amazon is the preferred vendor for millions of people and the and the price comparison standard for millions of people, a lot of your business will go to amazon.  This will reduce your profits because you will pay them commission, complicate your shipping if you fulfill amazon customers in a different way, and add another element of work for your accountant.

I don't know anything about your site but I can say that most domains are unable to beat Amazon for most of the products that they sell.  I can't beat amazon for most of the products that I sell.

A lot of people think that organic rankings and sales happen through tricks and tweaks.  They instead are wrested away from competitors through planning, skill and force.  It comes down to a battle of resources.  If a company wants to succeed, they need to put up enough resources to become competitive and at the same time apply them smartly.  The more force you put into it and the earlier it is applied, the greater the chances of success.  If I was management at your company, you would be getting a lot more help and we would be hiring authors and illustrators.

I would also make them into one big website.

But at the same time, I would have full unique content for each of the 250 locations.  I know that sounds like a huge expense and a lot of work, but any company who has the resources to support 250 locations can support the small expense of unique content for each of them.

Glad to help.  It makes me really mad when people steal content.

I forgot to add that your competitors might become your ally in this type of fight.  I have an Indian competitor, a really smart and hard-to-beat company for the past decade, who joined me in fighting these infringers.  If you can get another company in your niche to complain about the same websites, I think that will have a good impact.  Never hurts to have friends in India. 

OMG!  No!

If you would have earned #1 position from the beginning of Google, that would have been your best opportunity to have organic traffic that matched what you see in Google Trends.   HOWEVER, Google has become, a better webmaster, more concerned about meeting shareholder expectations, and has begun modifying the format of the search results pages to keep you on their search pages for more page views, display more ads, display more ads at the top of the SERPs, increase shopping results income, make more money.   So, if the #1 organic position, would have remained at the tippy-top of the SERPs for all of those years, then your traffic graph might be similar to Google trends.  Instead, the reality is that your traffic graph would have shown either a much steeper decline or much less dramatic growth.

I know how frustrating it can be when your work is grabbed by spammers.

We have work that has been wildly grabbed and republished by spammers in a competitive industry.  Our approach was to get educated about copyright and fair use, get an attorney ready to help, if needed, and then attack the spammers with DMCA, complaints to Adsense and complaints to hosts.  At first it seemed hopeless, but after nearly 200 DMCA's to Google and a lot of complaints to Adsense and hosting companies we are now seeing rewarding results.

If you are fighting this it is important to identify the spammers and then see if any high quality sites are linking to them, and then go after those links by letting the linking webmasters know that you are the real source of the information.  Before you do that be sure that your online information is totally better than what the spammers have put up.  If the spammers have up your whole collection and you only have half of it up then you are not as attractive of a link target.

Attacking with DMCA is the minimum.  Send them to Google search while logged into your Google account and use the Copyright Removal Dashboard.  That makes it easy for Google to see the mass of complaints that you are throwing at them.  It also makes it fast and easy to file several complaints every morning.

If those sites are running Adsense, attack their income stream.   Visit their site while logged into your adsense account.   Then click on the "ad choices" button in the upper right corner of an Adsense ad on their page.  That will take you to an Adsense Help page titled, "about google ads".   Scroll down to the bottom of that page and you will see "Leave feedback on the website or ad you just saw".   Click "the ads".  Then click "Adwords ad feedback form".  Then click on "An ad violates other AdWords policies".    Use that form to complain that they are publishing your copyrighted content.  I have found that the Adsense team often turns off the ads on those pages promptly and sometimes turns the ads off across the entire website.

Look at the Adsense codes on the websites to see if the same publisher code is used on lots of these sites.  If you find this then hammer those sites with complaints.   Be sure you let them know that these sites have MANY pages that contain stolen content to which you own copyright.  Complain that the same publisher has lots of websites, each with lots of your content.    Complain with enthusiasm.

Hosting companies will often respond by deleting images, pages or text that are your copyrighted content.  They might also delete entire sites.

Keep in mind that submitting DMCA, attacking their Adsense or getting them kicked off of their hosting can make people really mad.   So, be sure that you are within your right and they are not making fair use of your content.  Google or adsense or hosts will give the infringer your name when they notify them that a complaint was filed and they removed them from search, killed their adsense income or booted them off of the server.

Good luck.

(The above contains information about legal matters and I am not an attorney.  I warned you that you need advice from an attorney so that you know if these people are really infringing or if they are using your content under fair use.  If you do any of the things listed above they could get an attorney who will try to sue your pants off.  If you file DMCAs that are unmerited Google might provide free legal assistance or friends of the court support to the target of your DMCAs.   You are dead meat of that happens.)

Google has been fighting link spam and link schemes for a long time.  They have an entire team dedicated to rooting it out and penalizing it.   Lots of people have lost websites from doing exactly what you are talking about doing.

The best approach is to build a great website.  If you build a website that does not engage visitors well and promote it with links Google will identify the behavior of your visitors as inferior and fail to move your site up in the rankings.   It is like lipstick on a pig.  Google will recognize it.

If these links were going to be manufactured and pointed at my site, I would be scared that I would get an unnatural links penalty or a Penguin problem.   The people who have been hit with Penguin have been waiting two years to get out.  Two Years.  So, if you get hit, you might as well toss your site away.

First and foremost, you want to avoid SEOs who don't understand Google's Webmaster Guidelines.   Now, that might sound like a stupid requirement because "doesn't every SEO understand the webmaster guidelines?"  Fact is, they don't and that is why huge numbers of websites are suffering from Panda, Penguin and other penalties.  In many cases their SEOs did that to them because they built spammy links, made spammy content, etc.  Hiring an SEO is like picking up a snake and hoping that it isn't a rattler.  Be careful and know your snakes and understand webmaster guidelines so you can look at the work that the SEO is doing for you and determining if it is going to get you into trouble.

Next, there are lots of SEOs who will take on any job at any budget.  You might go to one of them unknowing the competitive level of your websites niche and tell the SEO that you have $5000 per month to spend.... and your niche is "digital cameras".   Your SEO needs to gauge the cost and methods of becoming competitive in that niche and bring your site into the money and earn a positive return sometime before your funeral.  Digital cameras?  Is that a $500 per month or a $5,000 per month or a $50,000 per month or a $500,000 per month attack?   If the SEO accepts you at $500 or $5000 per month then that SEO probably doesn't know what it is really going to take to become competitive in that niche, or he just cares about milking you for your money month after month and just stinging you along for as long as he can.   Here you have ignorant SEOs who will take your money and work for you not knowing that the amount you are paying isn't enough to fund a proper attack.  Then you have the ones you don't have the integrity or the courage to turn down paying work even if they know that the budget isn't enough to move the needle.  They just want your money.

Put a log-in box on your homepage and redirect the log-in page to the homepage.

I use live chat boxes frequently when I am shopping.   They often allow me to get an immediate answer from the company.

I don't like the ones that pop-up in my face.  Instead I prefer an obvious link or a logo that I can click to trigger the chat box.  When I use the chat box there is a very high probability that I will make a purchase and a much lower probability that I will return the purchased item.

I do not use live chat boxes on my own websites.  Why?  The same reason we don't have a phone number and our email address is hard to find.... because we are mainly a content shop and almost every question a buyer will have is answered on the website.  Instead of a link to a live chat we have links to an extensive content library.  The goal is to serve thousands of people per day with the content rather than serving them one-on-one with calls, chats, emails.

Lots of people do not like this business model, but it is a legitimate business model.  And, once you have purchased from us you get our phone number email address and we will respond generously to your questions... but those are usually links or guidance to pages on our website that have an article, video or photographs that answer the most common customer questions.

OK... I know your site.   In that wasted white space at the top you should be offering everyone an opportunity to subscribe to breaking news and get links to breaking stories by email as soon as they are posted.  Allow them to subscribe by team, or league, or trades, or salary, or coaches or goalies, or Stanley Cup.

Back to your original question...  Start experimenting and keeping records.  You have the advantage of a strong site and a relevant site and a site that is quick with the news.  It could behave differently in different situations.

For important breaking news, every hour that passes means more webpages to compete with.  You should get your best shot out immediately.  If that doesn't perform well then additional pages are unlikely to do well - especially if you do not have a heavyweight site.

We have a website with a page that links to events in our industry.

Most of the events have a single homepage that is updated every year.  These homepages have a description of the upcoming event and links to agendas, registration, lodging, sponsors, speakers, exhibitors, past year highlights, etc.   If you do this your search engine visibility will develop over time because almost everyone that links to your event will link to this single page year after year, for all of their websites, and every time they mention the event over time.   Also, repeat visitors will be familiar and getting information, registering and finding lodging is "just like they did last year".

However, other events change the URL and everything else every year.   This is a really bad idea because employees at businesses like mine, who link to events, will be snarling when they see that you have changed the URL again and must go on a treasure hunt to find it.  Potential attendees will have trouble finding your event too.   We have stopped linking to some of these events because finding the new pages, updating the links, and editing information is too demanding of employee time.  We have not deleted a lot of events.  Just the ones that are pain in the butt.  When they get in touch with us to complain we tell them, let us know when you are done playing musical URLs.

Hi,  Nice to see your first question.  

I think that this question is one for "opinions" because Google will say that they treat all of these domains the same.   I think that Google is being honest with that answer.  But, there are a few reasons why you don't see many of these new domains at topSERPs.

1)  Getting to topSERPs these days takes a lot of work and a lot of time.  Most of these new types of domains have not been around long enough to reach that level in today's ultra-competitive environment.

2)  Some people don't like these domains.  They think that searchers who have never seen them before will be skeptical about trusting them.  I agree.   I don't have any plans of using one.  I'd rather pay $X,XXX or $XX,XXX to get a nice .com.   I put a lot of work into my sites and the cost of a nice domain is small compared to the amount of work that will go into the site.

If you have a genuine case of copyright infringement and have done what you need to do to protect your property then you might be able to start a DMCA complaint campaign against these pirates.  We had a lot of infringement happening so we got legal guidance to be sure we understand fair use, understand the possible consequences of filing DMCA and making sure that we were in a defensible position.  Then we started filing DMCAs to Google and to hosting companies and filing complaints to Adsense, where the sites were monetized that way.  Last year we filed over 100 DMCAs and lots of complaints to Adsense.  That work required a lot of time but it was helpful for improving our situation.  In the end it was time well spent.

Be sure to get qualified legal advice because copyright laws and the principles of fair use and fair dealings vary from one country to another.  Google will assist the defense of accused infringers in court if they believe that DMCA has been misused.

This has been the progression with Google for a long time.  First ads only on the right, then a couple ads at the top, now up to four ads at the top and ads at the bottom.   Shopping results and image results are tossed in as well.   Adwords ads get colored markers and easily get review stars.

Andy Drinkwater:  "Soon 1st place organic will be 2nd page!"

I agree.  Google has to show earnings growth to shareholders.  The only way that they can do it is to make 25% more money per year from existing traffic  - because getting 25% more traffic is no longer attainable.

The answer to this question depends upon your sources of traffic and the services that you offer to your visitors.

Let's say most of your traffic comes from websearch.  If you publish a second article on a separate page then getting it to rank well while the story is still breaking and lots similar stories are appearing on lots of other websites, is going to be difficult.  Then it might be better to update your first story because it will probably have better rankings.   If you decide to go this route then giving visitors a button that they can use to "subscribe to updates" will feed them improvements that you make the the original article.

But, if most of your traffic is direct or from breaking news sources, then publishing a brand new article on a brand new page might give you a "second shot" at attracting pageview for this subject.

There are other traffic acquisition methods.  Design your publishing/updating methods to fit well with them.

This issue can be cleanly solved by placing this site on a different hosting service.

That's what I would do instead of rigging-up complex ways of doing something simple.

Kickass images are the best optimization.

There are lots of good sites in Ukraine.   I'd make my decision about the quality of the site rather than where it appears to be located.

There are probably  more spammy sites out of New Jersey than out of Ukraine.

All of my 301 redirects will still be in place when I attend my own funeral and my business succession plan orders the new owners to maintain them.

If you don't redirect and there are still links out there on other websites, Google spiders will not follow them to your site.  Human visitors who find these links and click them will discover air instead of your website.

This is a complex issue because you are chopping a piece out of one site and attaching it to another.   Because these sites are probably not equal in strength, size, popularity, authority, internal link structure and other attributes in the eyes of Google it will be difficult to predict the results with certainty.

Is it possible to move few pages from one domain to another by using 301 Redirection in .htaccess file?

This is the easy question.  The answer is "yes".

**Will it have any negative impact on our website's current search engine performance? **

Maybe.  If these pages have a lot of inbound links, the value of those links contribute to the strength, trust and authority of the domain that they are pointed to.  If you remove these pages from Site A and they are significant contributors to its rankings, then the performance could fall.  In my opinion, moving valuable assets are always going to be a loss for the domain from which they are taken.

Will it be considered as a legitimate SEO practice by Google Search Engine?

Probably.

Will Google understand that these pages have been moved permanently to another domain and start showing URL's from the new domain on the same positions where they were ranking before moving to new location?

Probably not.   If you move them to a much more powerful, popular and more trusted domain they might rank higher - but no guarantees.  If you move them to a weaker, less popular and less trusted domain the rankings might drop.  Google says that there is a small loss of pagerank through a redirect.  If that is true then you have a guaranteed power loss, which might or might not impact their rankings.

There are many challenges to building a really large site.  Most of them are related to building the site, but one that often kills the success of the site is the ability to get the pages into the index and keep them there.  This requires a steady flow of spiders into the deepest pages of the site.  If you don't have continuous and repetitive spider flow the pages will be indexed, but then forgotten, before the spiders return.

An effective way to get deep spidering is have powerful links permanently connected to many deep hub pages throughout the site.  This produces a flow of spiders into the site and forces them to chew their way out, indexing pages as they go.   These links must be powerful or the spiders will index a couple of pages and die.  These links must be permanent because if they are removed the flow of spiders will stop and pages in the index will be forgotten.

The goal of the hub pages is to create spider webs through the site that allow spiders to index all of the pages on short link paths, rather than requiring the spiders to crawl through long tunnels of many consecutive links to get everything indexed.

Lots of people can build a big site, but only some of those people have the resources to get the powerful, permanent links that are required to get the pages indexed and keep them in the index.   You can't rely on internal links alone for the powerful, permanent links because most spiders that enter any site come from external sources rather than spontaneously springing up deep in the bowels of your website.

I don't want to get penalized for duplicate content

Best practice would be to write unique content everywhere it is needed.

Or, you could serve the visitor to combine these pages and allow them to directly compare and choose.

I agree with Jordan.

Read the beginner's guide once from start to finish.  While you read, make a list of the things that you can do to improve your site.  Then organize the list into a logical sequence.  When finished, start doing the work and reading that part of the guide a second time to be sure that you are doing the work properly.

Two stories...

One of my competitors has their site redesigned about once a year.  Twice in the past three years their designer tossed the new site up with noindex on every page.      We notice right away but it usually takes them a week or two to figure out what's happened.  When the remove the noindex the site returns to normal in a few days.

I noindexed a folder of 80 thin content pages immediately after Panda 2.0 in April, 2011.  I allowed the pages to be open to visitors because they had some good photos and data tables on them.   The site escaped in the Panda 2.1 about a month later. 

Then, I started publishing same-topic articles on the same URLs, using all of the original content that was noindexed.  When the article is finished, I remove the noindex.  A new articles has the noindex removed about once a month.  (It takes a long time to republish 80 pages at the rate of one a month.)

These URLs reside two clicks from the homepage on a long-established and reasonably powerful site.  When I remove the noindex the amount of time for the page to start ranking can vary from hours to several weeks.  A few times I went into the code to see if I forgot to remove the noindex - and I had not forgotten.   Some of these page go right to the top of google for competitive terms.  Others have trouble getting reindexed even though we point internal links to them on many parts of the site.  We have waited a couple of months for some to be reindexed.

Good luck.

**Are there any common metrics or ways to guess what the visitor impact could be? **

The historical performance your content production and outreach teams have experienced in this or a similar vertical, combined with the current strength and historical reputation of the domain where the content will be placed.   This will be the best predictor of future performance if you ask me.

It would be really easy to blow buckets of money on this if your project doesn't have the right leadership, financial resources and talent.

The plan will produce at least 10 quality, original articles per day.

Ten per day?   That's a lot if you want impact.... You might need 50 top people to pull this off,  with a combination of authors, writers, editors, webmasters, illustrators, researchers, and outreach experts.

I have not used Facebook ads yet.  Only Adwords.