Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Much appreciated! I had actually already submitted a request to DMOZ to have that changed, but obviously it hasn't been done yet. If that's not resolved soon, we'll add the meta tag. Thanks again.

Trying to figure out what is causing a site to show up under a former name in Google. The name of the client is Fortenberry Legal.  They changed from Fortenberry Law Group over a year ago. I can't find any code on the site that uses the old name.  For some reason, it still shows up as "Fortenberry Law Group" in Google. When I search for "Fortenberry Law Group," that shows up in Google with a full set of site links.  When I search under the new name (Fortenberry Legal), that also shows up in Google but without the site links. Any thought on what could be causing this?

Thanks for the responses.

I know I could have gotten the link by now. It's not a question of time but of money, but let's not get too sidetracked by that.

I've paid for Yahoo, etc., directory listings and have seen some benefit, especially for new sites that I am trying to get on the map in terms of SEO.

We're getting hung up on a diversion (the fact that I'm paying for the directory listing). People pay to join BBB, Chamber of Commerce, Yahoo, Business.com, etc., because the sites are authoritative directory listings. Most of them wouldn't do it without the link because they know the link carries SEO value. I would submit this isn't the same thing as paying an Indian SEO for a link from his buddy's spammy site. If you disagree, fine.  But maybe we could hold of the "don't by links" refrain for a little while. I know that some folks have been drinking the Google Kool-aid for so long that they can't think about this sort of thing logically. I'm not doing anything black hat here.  So let's forget about the paid part.  What I want to know is this: What is a worthwhile link? Assume it takes me 4 hours to get every single link and I don't pay a dime for any of them. What links are worth targeting and which aren't?

Thanks again for your thoughts. Any additional comments would be appreciated.  I am new to the SEOmoz tools (still in the evaluation period) and am trying to find out if they will help me with link-building.

Thanks for the response, but how can you say you wouldn't do it without knowing the value it would pass to your site? I assume it's worth something to be listed in a high authority directory. My question is: Where is the cut off?

BTW, it's a paid directory, but it's not spammy (think BBB, Chamber of Commerce, etc.). It has value other than the link, but the link is what I am most interested in.

I don't put much stock in PR. I'm looking at the mozrank quality indicators.

I'd like to get everyone's thoughts about the minimum quality/authority thresholds that you look for in link-building.

What is the minimum PA/mR/mT/DA/DmR/DmT that you like to see before investing time in acquiring a link?

At what point is the link not worth the effort (or, in the case of a directory listing, the cost) of acquiring it?

Thanks to all who have responded.  Let me bring it back to my original question, though, which I may have obscured with all of the related information.  All else being equal:  on a scale of 1 to 10, how important is it that the link and anchor text appear in the first paragraph in the post instead of 500+ words later in the author attribution box? I know that there's some benefit (in terms of more authority), but how much?

Of course, I know this is somewhat speculative. Just wanting to get your views.

I can't imagine that this would cause problems. When I have a question of this nature, I try to take off my search engine goggles and think about user experience. From this view, differing title and H1 tags would be a better indicator of SEO gamesmanship. From the user's perspective, what they see in SERPs sets up an expectation for what is shown on the page. If I click on a link for "Top 10 Digital Camera Reviews," I expect to see an article of the same title on the page.  For search engines to penalize this would be nonsensical.

Of course, if both your title and H1 tags say "camera, cameras, camera reviews, review camera, how to review camera," then you have a problem.  But, as mentioned above, that's not intrinsic to the matching H1 and title tags.

Thanks for the response.  It's a so-so site. The site has a DmR of 4.2, but doesn't seem to pass much authority to the blog portion of the site (the blog is integrated into a larger website).  The article will be relevant to the site visitors, but we are unlikely to see any conversions from visitors of this site (it's a legal article and the attorney who authored it can only practice in her jurisdiction). Other blog posts by guest authors don't seem to rank particularly well, but there are some exceptions.

I'm working on a series of guest posts to help promote a site.  These are competitive, high quality posts from a well-respected resource in the industry. I placed the author introduction at the front of the posts, with anchor text for the keywords we are targetting (e.g., "This is a guest post by John Doe, a [keyword] who ... and writes about [keyword].").

I understand that having the anchor text in a prominent location - such as near the front of the post - will probably be more authoritative than a sentence at the very end.  My question: how significant is this difference?

The blog that I am posting on wants to include author information at the end only and only have one link using the site name (which doesn't contain keywords). The post I sent had two deep links using keyword-rich anchor text, placed at the beginning. I am trying to decide whether to walk away and keep shopping the material around.

Thanks for the quick response. These pages aren't generating traffic, and I am not even sure that they are indexed by Google.  Most of the posts, patricularly the newer ones, use the canonical rel tag. Would there be any downside to blocking these pages?

I'm working on a series of guest posts to help promote a site.  These are competitive, high quality posts from a well-respected resource in the industry. I placed the author introduction at the front of the posts, with anchor text for the keywords we are targetting (e.g., "This is a guest post by John Doe, a [keyword] who ... and writes about [keyword].").

I understand that having the anchor text in a prominent location - such as near the front of the post - will probably be more authoritative than a sentence at the very end.  My question: how significant is this difference?

The blog that I am posting on wants to include author information at the end only and only have one link using the site name (which doesn't contain keywords). The post I sent had two deep links using keyword-rich anchor text, placed at the beginning. I am trying to decide whether to walk away and keep shopping the material around.