Sorry to respond to your question with a set of questions, but there are some things to consider because the old press releases may provide value in ways that might not be obvious. I'd ask yourself or the client these things:

1. Public companies are required to report and archive company news and financial information. If its a public company, then I'd keep them because press releases are a way to satisfy this legal requirement.

2. Is there even a small chance that the releases would need to be cited for something? Say a customer or reporter asks a question (over e-mail or on social media or something) -- it could be answered by sending a link to an old press release. Plus, old information can always be valuable for "institutional knowledge" -- say a bunch of longtime employees leave, then new hires could read them to get up to speed on what the company has done in the past.

3. Might the press releases contain text that could be found in relevant, long-tail searches? If so, I'd keep them.

4. Are there external links to the press releases (check Open Site Explorer or similar tools)? If so, I'd keep them (and obviously 301 redirect the links to the new site).

These are just a few issues off the top of my head. In general, I think that there's never a case when a website can have too much information or content (as long as it's managed well). Unless you're talking about hundreds of pages, I don't see how a migration would be too much of a pain. Plus, it's always good to have extensive company archives because, well, you never know!

I can tell you that the old press releases on my company's site get a bit of traffic -- both straight from organic search and from people navigating there from other pages. I'm sure the same is true for most sites.

Again, this is just my two cents. Whatever you end up doing, good luck!

Regardless of what the competitor is doing, it does not violate Google guidelines to put a phone number in a meta description. You can put whatever text you want -- especially since the meta description is no longer a ranking factor. Putting the phone number there can be a very good idea -- it minimizes the distance between the prospect and a salesperson.

However, the issue is that such a scenario is not easily tracked in analytics (and it probably cannot be tracked at all). I'll post a few links have on how to integrate phone-based inquiries with Google Analytics:

How Call Tracking With Google Analytics Increases Your Profits

Mobile Calls Are the New Conversions

I hope this helps!

I'm afraid that there isn't a perfect solution, but there are various options to consider.

1.) The only way to "combine the SEO juice of both pages" is to 301 redirect one of the pages to the other (and add the content from the old page to the remaining one). However, this means that the second page will no longer exist for your website visitors (coming from organic search or not).

2.) You can use a rel=canonical tag pointing from the secondary page to the preferred one to encourage Google to list only the preferred one the pages in search results. In addition, you could use the robots.txt file or noindex meta tag (the meta tag is the preferred option) to block search engines from indexing the page and having it appear in search results. However, this will not "combine the SEO juice."

Assuming that it is crucial that the second page still exist on your website, I would probably not do anything. You appear twice in the first page of results -- great! Why mess with that? I would just focus on doing all the good SEO best practices and earning more links to those two pages to push them higher over time. (Of course, if I knew your exact situation, I would probably have additional suggestions.)

That's a very subjective question, so I'll just list some references that you may want to review: Google's SEO guide (see pages 8-9 for URLs), Ann Smarty's post at SEJ, Moz's guide to URL best practices, and an old Moz post by Rand Fishkin on good URLs. I hope this helps!

Dr. Pete and others answered a similar question here. I agree with their sentiments: no-index any pages that may even come close to seeming "thin" or duplicates of other similar pages. Following Panda, you just don't want to risk it.

I would not use a .eu domain if I were you (or probably anyone else). It's too big and generic of a target when Europe is full of so many countries and languages. I'd recommend it only for a site such as Eurovision. Now, there are three ways to do it.

**1. Separate root domains.**This would be creating and using example.be and example.nl.

2. Separate subdirectories/subfolders. Take your main website at example.com and configure its targeting (in the meta data and Google Webmaster Tools) to either Belgium or the Netherlands. Then, create a subdirectory/subfolder for the other country (example.com/nl/ or example.com/be/) and configure its targeting as well.

3. Separate subdomains. This would be creating nl.example.com and be.example.com

SEOs and digital marketers will argue forever over which one is best. I'll point out some general differences and points since I don't know your specific situation.

• Separate root domains and subdomains are essentially entirely-separate sites in Google's eyes. This is good to use when you have a lot of specialized content for each domain's target audience/country/topic. It's also usually easier to use different design templates on different domains and subdomains. The bad side is that links pointing to one domain or subdomain will probably not "benefit" the other one.
• Keeping everything on one domain in a second subdirectory/subfolder can be a lot more simple to manage. Plus, all links to everywhere on the domain generally "help" everything on the domain. However, you will often be limited to using the same overall design template.

Since you cannot create country-specific content, I'd create one website and use a secondary subdirector/subfolder (number two in the main list at the top). Google says the duplicate content is not a problem as long as it is clear that the two versions are each targeting a different location.

As to why your current .nl website is not performing, it's impossible to say without taking a look at it. First, review this page of introductory guidelines and the related links. Some more detail from Google. A Webmaster Support question.

For more information on international strategy, I'd suggest this post by Moz Associate Aleyda Solís. Good luck!

The basic theory is that as you go down a website's hierarchy, the more you go from short-tail, general themes to long-tail, specific things. Here's the rough idea:

• Home Page -- very general short-tail
• Blog (or other main section page) -- general and short-tail
• Post Category (or a section subpage) -- specific and long-tail
• Blog Post -- very specific and long-tail

Basically, items like blog posts should ideally be the best sources of authoritative information on very specific topics such as a post each on "international seo," "e-commerce seo," and "b2b seo." All of these posts could be within a category of "seo strategy" for which the category page would aim to rank.

As far as click-through rate -- it depends on the keyword. You should aim to give whatever will address the user intent behind a given search query. The more that the query is very, very specific, the more that it should probably be targeted by a specific post. The more that it is a general, informational query, the more that users may want to be taken to a collection of posts.

Now, I wouldn't know what to suggest for your website because I have not seen it. But I hope this helps!

Yes, you can. In the section of the page, put a line of code like this:

rel="canonical" href="FULL EXTERNAL URL" />