Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I know the Google index is obviously a lot larger than the MOZ index...but....

I have 8,000 links from blogspot.com according to Webmaster tools, and just one link according to OSE

I have 600 links from an online dictionary according to Webmaster tools, not one is mentioned in my OSE report.

I'd go so far as to say most of my top 10 linking domains according to Webmaster Tools, don't even have a single mention in my OSE report.

We've been hit hard by Penguin 2.0 and I want to look at our link profile.....it seems OSE may be great for looking at my competitors link profiles,  but for my own site it seems to be, well, not very accurate at all!

So from a trying to do undo the damage caused by Penguin 2.0 point of view, should I just use webmaster tools and forget about OSE?

Thanks!

Just a thought after further digging...the keyword in question is "Marbella Property" hence there being places results.  I know that "In the past, owing to wording in the guidelines, it was not considered a best practice to put any type of geographic data in the description"...that makes sense for a places listing. But my Google Page has far more info on and of course I'm going to say we sell Marbella Property in our description on the Google Page!

The one review we did have....was from the bad old days before I took over...not real in other words. But as this hasn't been carried over to the Google+ page I cant see that I'd be penalised for it.

For quite some time our Google Places listing has been in the Universal Results...(for this keyword there is a 7-pack result). Which was great, we had a PPC ad at the top of the page, we were 3rd in the Universal Results (there was 3 places listings before the natural results)...and we were 6th in the natural results - meaning we were on the first page 3 times...which means a happy boss....and lots of traffic.

The old places listing was linked to our new Google+ Page pending the eventual demise of places and the merge.

The merge has happened, all information from the places listing has migrated (apart from reviews and photos??) and the places listing has been deleted (URL returns 404 error).

Problem is now my Google +  Page is not even within the first 2 or 3 pages of places results never mind in the Universal results. So it would appear the rank / authority that the places listing had...hasn't been transferred to the Google+ page.

My competitors...who were in 1 + 2 in the universal results above the natural results and who have Google+ Pages with NOTHING on...bar their name, are still there!

Why would I be dropped when my Google+ Page, has more info, more followers, more photos, more relevant content (they don't have any content ) than my 2 competitors. It seems I've been penalised....somebody suggested that I had the keyword twice in my "About" and twice in my "Introduction" info and that could be it.  I thought the loss of the review might be it too...but neither of the businesses now occupying the first 3 spots..have any reviews at all.

Anybody else suffered from this? Anybody any other suggestions to why I might have been dropped so dramatically in the places listings? (My SERP listing is unaffected for this keyword)

Keyword being mentioned twice hardly seems like "stuffing"!

I'm actually not too concerned about the places ranking....not a great driver of traffic...but appearing in the Universal Results did obviously drive traffic...and to appear in the Universal Results...I've now got about 30 positions to climb......

The whole Google+ Local  / Google Places thing has been a nightmare from start to finish....

Thanks in advance for any help or advice!

Yes we have 301 redirects in place so all should be OK.

Thank you for you reply!

I've recently taken over SEO for my company. There are a lot of old links that point to our old URL (www.examplecountry.com changed to (www.examplewhatwedo.com). We have the correct redirects in place and Open Site Explorer shows many of the links pointing to the old site even though I'm inputting the new URL.

I just want to put my mind at rest that any value these links have doesn't got lost due to the URL change. Unfortunately a lot of them have the old URL as the anchor text....which I guess will decrease their quality?

Thanks!