Here's all the things you can do to try geotarget your content for the search bots:

• Register each subfolder as a separate site in Google Webmaster Tools (e.g. example.com/ca/, example.com/us/), and geotarget it (see here).
• Set meta tags or http headers on each page to let Bing know the language and country (see here).
• For duplicate or near-duplicate pages across different English speaking localities, you can try out the hreflang tags to clue Google in that they're the same page, but geotargeting users in different locations.  I haven't personally implemented this myself, so I can't speak to how well it works, but you can find more info about it hereand here.

Setting nofollows just stops PageRank from flowing, but bots can still follow these links, so I wouldn't do that.

Sure, 10,000 people is enough to run a retargeting campaign.

You might try bringing up the bid to get some more impressions and see how it goes.  100 impressions isn't enough to tell much of anything.  Retargeting does tend to have the highest ROI of any display advertising if you target it properly.  Since the users in your retargeting list are more likely to convert on your site since they've been there before, you can tolerate a higher CPC with retargeting as compared to other display campaigns.

Are you segmenting your retargeting lists into many smaller lists?  You can split your lists into users that have made it further down your conversion funnel, and bid higher the further they've made it down the funnel already (e.g. visited a subscription page and left, or added items to a shopping cart and abandoned it).  If you're using Adwords and Google Analytics, you can do this easily with Google Analytics Remarketing, and retarget any visitors on your site based on things like time on site, pages they've visited, and custom events and goals they've accomplished (or not accomplished).

<spans>are all over the web, and used in lots of different situations.  It shouldn't adverse affect your rankings.</spans>

That being said, going over your site and adding s into all your <a>s doesn't sound like fun... and after all you may want to change it again down the road.  You can't accomplish something similar with CSS?  I think styling your</a> <a>s with "display:block;" should accomplish the same thing as adding this to all your</a> <a>s?</a>

Go to your Keywords tab, and select that single keyword, Go to the Keyword details tab, and select "Auction Insights".  This will give you a bunch of useful information:

• Impression share: How often you ad shows up
• Avg. position: The average position of your ad when it does show up
• Overlap rate: You can see how often your ad appears vs. other advertisers
• Position above rate: How often you're ranking above other advertisers.
• Top of page rate: How often you're at the top of the page (vs. the side).

So if your average position is already between 1-2, and your impression share is high, raising the bid probably won't do much.  However, if you're not at the top of the page much, or your impression share is lower, you might be able to get more clicks by raising the bid.

I've been migrating to using Google Analytics for our remarketing lists (see here) to keep all these Adwords pixels from hanging around on my site.  Unless you're using these for doing remarketing on the search network... the Google Analytics segments aren't supported for that yet, but I was told by my reps to expect that soon.

As Remus said, there's absolutely no problem with having multiple Adwords remarketing pixels on one page.

For geo-redirects, I do not recommend you use 301 redirects.  Browsers can cache these, so if you tell a browser in Canada that example.com should redirect to www.example.com/ca-fr, and later the user changes their language to English, and then tries to go www.example.com, the browser could use that redirect again to go back to the French version without hitting your server.  301 tells the browser that www.example.com ALWAYS (permanently) goes to www.example.com/ca-fr.  Page rank isn't really a consideration with these, since Googlebot always comes from the US, so it should never hit these redirects.  If example.com always goes to one of the versions via a redirect (i.e. you don't serve content under that root URL), then you do have a bit of problem with redirects.  You don't want to 302 Googlebot to another page for your home page, but at the same time, you want to avoid weird redirect behaviors for your customers.

Google can visit the international versions directly without redirects, right?  They should have no problem indexing those pages then.

I agree with István, get some local links to your different local versions, register them each with Google Webmaster Tools (and Bing), put up sitemaps for each, and implement the hreflang tags in your sitemaps (or pages).  That way Google can easily index each version, and knows exactly what each version is for.

If you view the source of your page (hitting cntl +u should do this), and find the image on the page, it should have an alt attribute on it.  For example:

As a user, I prefer the URLs without.  Looking at the SEOMoz 2011 Rankings, longer URLs correlate to worse rankings, so do yourself and your users a favor and save them 5 characters.

http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#metrics-8

Yeah, this page should return a 404 status code as a 404 page, not a 200.  Otherwise search bots (like Googlebot and Roger) will think this is a regular page on your site, and as such this page could appear in search results.

I had a similar problem, Google was picking up

<noscript>text and using it as the description for our pages in some SERPs.  We didn't want to remove them, so we tried using "googleoff" and "googleon" tags, which are just HTML comments that Googlebot can read.  You can read their documentation <a href="https://developers.google.com/search-appliance/documentation/68/admin_crawl/Preparing#pagepart" target="_blank">here</a>.  We wrapped the text in the <noscript> with these comments, and it worked like a charm, so it does look like Google respects these tags.</p> <p>If I were you, I'd go ahead and add the syntax if it's easy for you to do (i.e. only have to add it a few places in the code, not in thousands).  It's probably not great for your SEO that Google thinks your site is about Javascript.  Or you can do what Frederico says and remove it.  Only you know your user base, but he's probably right.  Almost everyone for the most part everyone has Javascript enabled these days.</p> <p>I originally read about this in the Quora thread <a href="http://www.quora.com/Quora/Why-hasnt-Google-banned-Quora-for-hiding-answers-from-search-engine-visitors" target="_blank">here</a>.  Quora Uses it to control what text Googlebot can index on their pages.  If you want to see an example of it on my site, you can view one of our skills <a href="http://www.ixl.com/math/pre-k/identify-circles-squares-and-triangles" target="_blank">here</a>.</p></noscript>

I don't think it's necessarily bad.  I'm just not sure it's as compelling as stating the savings and an expiration date in your ad.  You could try running an ad with the code, and a similar one without it, and see which does better.

If the user doesn't write down the code and later forgets it, they may might not be able to find it again!  If you do use a promo code in your ad copy, make sure it's easy to find on the landing page, or automatically added the customers cart when coming from your ad.

One article I found reinforcing this: http://certifiedknowledge.org/blog/be-careful-of-using-discount-codes-in-your-ad-copy/

Even though the recipes are the same, I doubt they'd be penalized for having duplicate content.  If the search engine decides that it's duplicate content, it may filter out one or the other, and may knock one page down in the search results.  If your first page of results was all the same page from different domains, the search engine would have failed you.  The duplicate content penalties you're thinking about are more for spammers and spam content, where they're duplicating a lot of content, and doing it intentionally.

In your example, there is a lot else on the page other than the ingredients and the recipes, so that also should mitigate some of the duplication, and they're also laid out a bit differently in the HTML between the two pages, one with divs and one with tables.

Sources:

• [Google Webmaster Central Blog '08](Google Webmaster Central Blog '08 )
• High Rankings Advisor (Jill Whalen) '10

I'm taking this as comparing Adroll vs. Adwords as an advertiser... if you mean as a publisher, then ignore my answer.

First, Adwords has all sorts of different display advertising, Adroll is all retargeting Advertising.  I prefer Adwords because it's completely self-service, and I can see all the data and statistics for my placements.  You can see a lot of stats in Adroll, but they don't display conversion stats in the interface for your specific placements.  Also, with Remarketing Lists in Google Analytics, I can get pin-point remarketing based on custom events and goals within Google Analytics.  You can duplicate a lot of this within Adroll, but it requires communicating everything with your reps.

With Adroll you'll get some reps who will help you optimize your campaigns, and with Adwords, if you don't already have reps, you'll be on your own.  Adroll has a further reach than the Google Display Network, so your ads can reach other display networks, as well as Facebook.

Where I work, we use both to maximize our reach!