Welcome to the Q&A Forum

<a name="_GoBack"></a>I have a real estate client who creates individual property sites (mini-sites), each with their own URL (123MainStreet.com), each linking to 2 or 3 diverse pages on the main broker site (main site). There are a couple thousand on these pages at any one time, feeding into a large broker site. The SEO effect of these mini-sites is that there are many incoming links to the main site from various URLs, however, the mini-sites have little SEO relevance, given that there are few, if any inbound links to the mini-sites themselves, and the mini-sites only exist for the market life of a property. My question is: Does it make more SEO sense to create a series of pages (externalsite.com/123mainstreet) on a single site that already has good traction and relevance?  The inbound links to the main site will have more relevance, but they will all be coming from the same domain (or subdomain).  And although the links will all be coming from the same external site, the inbound links will be from a variety of pages on external site to a variety of pages on the main site. Any insight would be appreciated.

My company runs a real estate site (http://yochicago.com) that features editorial blog and video content. In our footer, we feature links to some of our client sites.  That footer is global, i.e., on every page of the site, of which there are thousands. One of our clients has been hit by Google for unnatural links.  While I am very aware of them using a network of junk sites (http://www.seomoz.org/q/can-our-white-hat-links-get-a-bad-rap-when-they-re-alongside-junk-links-busted-by-panda), could we be contributing to the problem? Our site has the most links into the troubled site.

My firm has been creating content for a client for years - video, blog posts and other references. This client's web vendor has been using bad links and link farms to bolster rank for key phrases - successfully.  Until last week when Google slapped them. They have been officially warned on WMT for possibly using artificial or unnatural links to build PageRank. They went from page one of the most popular term in Chicago for their industry where they had been for over a year - to page 8 - overnight.  Other less generic terms that we were working on felt the sting as well. I was aware of and had warned the client of the possibility of repercussions from these black hat tactics (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-google-makes-liars-out-of-the-good-guys-in-seo#jtc170969), but didn't go as far as to recommend they abandon them. Now I'm wondering if one of our legitimate sites (YoChicago.com), which has more than its share of the links into the client site is being considered a bad link.  All of our links are legitimate, i.e., anchor text equals description of destination, video links describe the entity that is linked to.  Our we vulnerable? Any insight would be appreciated.

I'm recommending some on-page optimization for a home builder building in several new home communities. The site has been through some changes in the past few months and we're almost starting over. The current URL structure is http://homebuilder.com/oakwood/features where homebuilder = builder name Oakwood Estates= name of community features = one of several sub-paths including site plan, elevations, floor plans, etc. The most attainable keyword phrases include the word 'home' and 'townname' I want to change the URL path to: http://homebuilder.com/oakwood-estates-townname-homes/features Is there any problem with doing this?  It just seems to make a lot of sense. Any input would be appreciated.

We run a blog/video real estate site (yochicago.com) as one of the venues for sponsored content for our clients looking for off-page SEO and inbound links. I'm working with a client who we've linked to a handful of times in the last few weeks, but I'm not seeing any external links from our site on PRO/OSE. Come to find that our writer has been linking to http://clientsite.com, instead of http://www.clientsite.com, which is the canonical site.  I wouldn't have thought that this would make a difference, and about an hour of web research seems to confirm that it shouldn't make a difference, save for losing a little bit of SEO credit. What am I missing?  Any input would be appreciated.

The keyword rankings in one of my campaigns update on Tuesday.  It looks like they updated today but when I downloaded to CSV, some say last Tuesday. Is this because they didn't change or are they still updating?  Today is Tuesday. i.e., do they update at a specific time and if so, what time?

Usually they have a little day icon of when they will be updated, but I did some adjusting from around 65 to 98 keywords, but only 54 show up. Is this normal? Do I just need to wait?  Some of my page 1 keywords are MIA.

Working with a new client with large websites.  On the competitive domain analysis the numbers for my client and 3 competitors was 48 | 52, 51, 55 For 2 whole weeks it jumped to 68 | 48, 43, 51 and there were some really odd supporting numbers such as total links moving from 107K originally to 806K. Just today, the numbers have reverted to the previous numbers. I am relatively new to moz and like the reports, but this is very unnerving. Is there an explanation?  Anyone else seeing this? Added: Aargh. The numbers just jumped back to the previous high numbers.  Help.