Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey Ryan,

it will be the same URL but we won't display the complicated JS (which the bot unfortunately can't interpret) to the googlebot, just the same structure. Thanks for your help, I'm afraid despite your best efforts, I'm still not sure what the best practice is here... Anyone?

Thanks, Frank

Hey Ryan, thanks, and sorry about that:

Users will of see the JS version and googlebot (and other bots) will see a purely html based site. I will change the original question accordingly.

Frank

Hi there,

we are currently setting up a pure html version for Bots on our site amazine.com so the content as well as navigation will be fully indexed by google. We will show google exactly the same content the user sees (except for the fancy JS effects). So all bots get pure html and real users see the JS based version.

My questions are first, if everyone agrees that this is the way to go or if there are alternatives to this to get the content indexed. Are there best practices? All JS-based websites must have this problem, so I am hoping someone can share their experience.

The second question regards the optimal number of content pieces ('Stories') displayed per page and the best method to paginate. Should we display e.g. 10 stories and use ?offset in the URL or display 100 stories to google per page and maybe use rel=”next”/"pref" instead.

Generally, I would really appreciate any pointers and experiences from you guys as we haven't done this sort of thing before!

Cheers, Frank

Used to be free, now it's 9,99$ per year certainly not unreasonable, but some sort of demo would be nice so one knows what to expect. Do you have another recommendation?

Hey Jason, I personally wouldn't. Based on what I have read here, the juice on the nofollow links is basically just wasted

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/google-maybe-changes-how-the-pagerank-algorithm-handles-nofollow

So it doesn't help you at all is just a lot of work. And remember, juice that goes to your "contact us" page also goes from that page to your navigation, i.E. also your "money pages".

I would rather spend my time optimizing the internal navigation, for example. Or creating content. It all depends on the specific site, though!

In my experience, the only accurate tool is goole analytics (or other analytics software, of course). Webmaster tools is helpful for sitemap and crawling related issues, but I wouldn't trust the keywords section too much.

This is even more the case for insights for search, these numbers are mostly usable to see trends, but not detailled analytics. You might want to use the google adwords tool instead, probably more reliable than the latter two: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal

Hope this helps!

Exactly! And as most of the high PR links you have right now are probably brand name or URL, influencing the ones you can will probably still result in a natural ratio of both types.

I just quickly checked the URL in your profile with opensiteexplorer: The Top 30 URLs are pretty much all domain or brand, so even if you could add 5 powerful optimized links, the ratio still would be ok, in my personal opinion.

Hey Mozzers,

I just read about the global rollout of googles Panda/Farmer Update for English queries, e.g. at searchengineland. Has anyone read something about when google is planning to roll out the update for non-English speaking countries, i.e. queries in other languages?

I googled a bit but couldn't find anything, not even speculations.

Cheers,

Frank

Hey Thomas,

I get the idea, my train of thought was the following: As you say, the WSJ or NYT or whatever high quality site usually rather links to your site with the URL or brandname, rarely with an optimized anchor. Hence, if you have the ability to influence the anchor at a high quality site, this probably won't hurt, as your more powerful links generally have more branded keywords anyhow.

So the overall ratio of URL / brand / optimized anchor for high quality sites, shouldn't be bad, if your link building efforts are reasonable.

Just read about this: https://tools.seogadget.co.uk/ in Rands Article, maybe it helps.

Hey Zack,

I am pretty sure, you meant "link building", right?

In this case I would assume, a mix of different keywords and/or brand terms are ideal, getting more targeted anchors from the more powerful sites should not be a problem.

Cheers,

Frank

Hey Ryan,

if you don't get data from google keyword or maybe google insights for search , chances are, there won't be too many searches. But as you say, the long tail (longer, less competitive but highly relevant) queries can bring valuable traffic as well. Prices for ads for those keywords will also help you determine the degree of competition for a term.

I would probably compare your ranking for some of these longer tail keywords (e.g. Position 3 in google), to the data in google analytics, there you can check, how many people came searching for each keyword. Or you use google webmaster tools, they will actually tell you what the rank in google for each keyword was. In my experience, data isn't as precise as in analytics, but it will still help to evaluate if going for longer, niche keywords would be the right thing to do. The most important factor is of course to check, if those customers actually convert and deliver any kind of revenue for you.

Hope this helps a bit, btw, the site looks great!

Cheers

Frank

Hey LJB,

I remembered I had read about the update schedule and found this google calender Linkscape update schedule:

http://apiwiki.seomoz.org/w/page/25141119/Linkscape-Schedule

I believe the changes appear pretty much right after an update, but I am not really sure on that. Hope this helps!